Bibliographic record
Abstract
The object of my article is Edward Ardizzone’s manuscripts of his four illustrated war diaries (1943-1945) preserved in his archives at the IWM in London, the published edition of his diaries entitled Diary of a War Artist (1974), the larger ink/watercolors commissioned by the WAAC during WWII which ensued from his preliminary sketches introduced in the bound pages of his diaries and finally the numerous unpublished images embedded between the manuscript pages of his diaries. His diaries represent a rich literary and pictorial context to study the aesthetic and transformative elements of format. Ardizzone’s play with format is multidimensional and complex as he uses various media (pencil, pen, watercolor, ink and wash) and different supports (pages of his bound diaries, sheets of paper, graph paper, watercolor paper) which vary greatly in dimension. The ever-changing format of his handwritten diary entries punctuated with sketches which visually interrupt his narrative, enhances the complexity of the diaries’ formats. Finally, the discrepancies I have observed between the manuscript versions of his diaries and its published edition adds another layer of complexity to my study of how format influenced Ardizzone’s creative output but also imposed physical restrictions on his artistic endeavours.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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".