The Political and Revolutionary Implications of the Mysterious History of Parquet Flooring
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This presentation seeks to ask about the potential political implications of the history of parquet flooring. This is to prove that while politics indeed shape art, art also has a hand in shaping politics; and it is more symbiotic than generally assumed. Using empirical quantitative and qualitative research, I traced the origins of parquet flooring to the Palace at Versailles. This is where wood and the techniques of marquetry were first used to replace a marble floor in the King’s bedroom. The marble was too cold, and as the King’s Bedroom had a number of issues with drafts, it added to the health risk to keep the marble floor. Changing the marble to wood, but keeping the pattern of a marble floor allowed for the aesthetics of marble without the hazard.This presentation will look at the history of parquet flooring and apply it to the political climate of pre-revolutionary France. It will first address the research required to find the origins of the flooring. It will then argue the necessity of parquet flooring, along with other later features of the palace, as symbolic of the flaws of absolutism. Finally, the presentation will how this symbolic art fits into the complicated relationship between politics and art.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.043 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".