Bibliographic record
Abstract
Georges de La Tour’s (b. 1593–d. 1652) artistic contributions were largely ignored by posterity until his “rediscovery” in 1915 by the art historian Hermann Voss. The patronage of such luminaries as the Duke of Lorraine, King Louis xiii, and Cardinal Richelieu, and the plethora of early copies, attest to his success during his lifetime. His eventual lapse into obscurity lasting almost three centuries led to the reattribution of his works to Italian, Netherlandish, Spanish, or French Baroque painters. While more than seventy oil paintings have been attributed to La Tour, fewer than forty are accepted as originals. The existence of his paintings in two or more versions, some as autograph replicas or as copies, along with questions about his son Étienne de La Tour’s possible pictorial contributions, left the attribution and chronology of his works mired in conjecture and controversy. Born the second son of a baker of some means at Vic-sur-Seille, he married a widow of minor nobility in 1617. Resettling to Luneville in the Duchy of Lorraine, he gained recognition as a painter in a region devastated by the ravages of the Thirty Years’ War (1618–1648). A casualty of an epidemic, La Tour died a few days after his wife at the height of his artistic career. The scarcity of documentary sources about his life is compounded by the total absence of evidence concerning his artistic training, professional travels, and artistic influences. La Tour’s pursuit of likeness between image and the natural world is believed to bear the influence of Caravaggio or his followers, reflecting post-Tridentine calls for the revitalization of religious imagery. La Tour’s paintings have been traditionally divided into daylight and night-time works, despite notable exceptions. Depictions of daylight serve to bring into moralizing relief foibles of secular life shown in realist genre scenes of brawling, cheating, and fortune-telling. Biblically inspired, his mysterious nocturnal or tenebrist works glow with a poetic luminosity imbued with spiritual connotations. Suspended in the stillness of religious contemplation, his candlelight paintings bear witness to the presence of inner life, depicting modes of consciousness that painting may only suggest but cannot ultimately show. Celebrated for their aura of mystery, his paintings continue to invite scholarly interest and public fascination.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.200 | 0.078 |
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".