MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283380569 · doi:10.32370/ia_2022_06_7

Feature and Specificity of Graphics and Difference from Other Arts

2022· article· en· W4283380569 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Yulia Lipchanskaya

Bibliographic record

VenueIntellectual Archive · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, Innovation and Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGraphicsFeature (linguistics)Computer scienceThe artsComputer graphicsGraphic artsKey (lock)Graphics softwareMathematics educationHuman–computer interactionMultimediaComputer graphics (images)Visual artsPsychologyArtLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Based on the analysis of scientific literature and relying on personal experience, the article briefly on the issues and the specific features of graphics, its definition on the main key features. Substantiates the basic techniques - practical principles of graphic art in terms of its further study and application, described the essence and specific features inherent in graphics. The work is addressed to researchers, employees of higher art - teacher education students.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.597
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.309
Teacher spread0.270 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntellectual ArchiveSame topicEducation, Innovation and Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207