MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3173156095 · doi:10.7202/1078068ar

Impressionism and Imperialism in Maurice Cullen’s African River

2021· article· fr· W3173156095 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Marnin Young

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversities Art Association of Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maurice Cullen (1866-1934) a longtemps été considéré comme le point d’origine de l’impressionnisme canadien. « Où » se trouve ce point, cependant, reste une question ouverte. Pour les critiques des années 1890, ses peintures étaient clairement « françaises ». Plus tard, Arthur Lismer et d’autres les ont vues comme l’incarnation de « l’esprit canadien ». Cullen a-t-il ainsi importé un style français ou en a-t-il cultivé un typiquement canadien ? L’auteur affirme que les premières oeuvres du peintre problématisent déjà, dans leur production même, ce dérèglement du lieu. Son argumentaire repose sur une analyse d’African River de Cullen, un tableau de 1893 qui représente la ville algérienne colonisée de Biskra. Dans sa combinaison de la technique impressionniste française et de l’iconographie impérialiste française, cette peinture « canadienne » se présente comme un cas typique révélant les contradictions spatiales inhérentes à l’impressionnisme mondial. Le tableau gère la contradiction, peut-on lire dans cet essai, en combinant deux manières distinctes, bien qu’imbriquées, de conceptualiser l’espace lui-même : phénoménologique et géopolitique.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score0.194

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207