MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3124560320 · doi:10.7202/1072986ar

Figuring Marisol’s Femininities

2020· article· fr· W3124560320 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Cécile Whiting

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFashion and Cultural Textiles
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesSculptureArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article analyse la sculpture de Marisol, la seule femme artiste de renom du Pop américain. Les oeuvres qu’elle construit à partir de boîtes en bois dotées d’appendices sculptés, de vêtements et d’accessoires contemporains, représentent des élégantes de la classe moyenne et de la bourgeoisie aisée dans leurs activités domestiques ou dans leurs promenades familiales. De nombreux détails—consistant le plus souvent en des formes de fesses et de seins, moulées en plâtre et fixées à l’extérieur des vêtements—viennent cependant détruire l’impression d’assurance en société que produisent de prime abord ces figures sculptées. Marisol ne traite toutefois pas ces femmes avec une simple distanciation amusée, puisque chaque sculpture correspond aussi à un autoportrait: des moulages de plâtre, des photographies ou des dessins représentant le visage de l’artiste ornent presque toutes ces figures de femmes à forte carrure. Cet article examine les moyens mis en oeuvre par les sculptures de Marisol pour parodier la représentation des femmes suivant la mode dans la presse à grand tirage; sur la même lancée, il analyse comment, par un retour ironique des choses, la presse adopte Marisol comme la femme artiste Pop par excellence et comme un modèle de chic Pop.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.142 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicFashion and Cultural TextilesFrench-language works237,207