Alexander Calder’s Half-Circle, Quarter-Circle, and Sphere (1932):A Complex History of Repainting Unraveled
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Whitney Museum of American Art, New York, owns one of the largest motorized works made by the renowned American artist Alexander Calder, titled Half-Circle, Quarter-Circle, and Sphere . Created in 1932, and acquired by the Whitney in 1969, this seminal work was featured in an iconic exhibition held in 2017 and entitled Calder: Hypermobility . Prior to that, the object underwent a series of treatments in order to repair its main kinetic elements that had become compromised during its lifetime. While the work’s mechanism retained its creator’s ingenious engineering solutions, the motor, urethane belts, plug, and electrical wires turned out to be neither original, nor authentic to the period. The appearance of the piece had also been altered, as most surfaces displayed multiple layers of overpainting and, thus, did not deliver the proper gloss, hue, and texture. These observations prompted a first, comprehensive scientific study to investigate the stratigraphy of Calder’s painted surfaces on Half-Circle, Quarter-Circle, and Sphere , with the final goal to comprehend and restore its original appearance through careful removal of the overpaint. Non-invasive X-ray fluorescence (XRF) analysis was carried out to gain initial insight into the paints’ composition. After that, extensive microscopic sampling was performed to assess the possible presence of original layers below the repainting throughout the object’s surface. Cross sections were examined with optical microscopy and analyzed with Fourier-transform infrared (FTIR) and Raman spectroscopies, as well as scanning electron microscopy coupled with energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (SEM/EDS), in order to identify pigments, colorants, and extenders located in the various paint layers. Scrapings were also investigated with pyrolysis – gas chromatography / mass spectrometry (Py-GC/MS) for a detailed characterization of the binding media. Scientific analysis revealed, in selected white and red areas, up to eleven layers of overpaint composed of a wide array of modern materials, including pigments (titanium white in the form of tetragonal rutile and a variety of synthetic organic red pigments) and binders (alkyd or late formulations of enamels based on ortho -phthalic acid / phthalic anhydride, glycerol and pentaerythritol, polyvinyl acetate with various plasticizers, and acrylics). On the other hand, the identification of materials that were available in the early 1930s, such as zinc white, calcite, and gypsum, as well as traditional drying oil binders, supported the hypothesis that a layer of original paint may still be present in certain areas. In addition to shedding new light on the stratigraphy of Calder’s painted surfaces, this study informed the optimization of a treatment plan tailored for the safe removal of the overpaint to uncover the original layer, wherever present.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".