MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297005496 · doi:10.33137/ijournal.v7i3.39327

World War II Art Restitution Exhibitions

2022· article· en· W4297005496 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Claire Elizabeth Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueThe iJournal Student Journal of the Faculty of Information · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEarth and Planetary Sciences
TopicArchaeological Research and Protection
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExhibitionRestitutionRepatriationVisual artsHistory of artArt historyWorld War IIArtContemporary artHistoryOrder (exchange)ArchaeologyLawPerformance artPolitical scienceArchitecture

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Art history is about more than just the works of art that are currently on display in art galleries and museums. It is also about all the works that have been lost, stolen, or destroyed due to tumultuous chapters in human history. One of the largest chapters in human history to affect art history were the events of World War II. In order to help heal the wounds caused by this war, art historians and museum professionals across Europe and North America have dedicated their time to provenance research in order to begin processes of restitution. Two museums that have allocated time and money for provenance research and art restitution are the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art in Kansas City, Missouri, USA, and the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, England. This paper will examine these two museums and the exhibitions that resulted from their provenance research, as well as their restitution and repatriation work. By exploring the efforts made by the Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art and the Victoria and Albert Museum, one is given a glimpse into how art historians and museum professionals can help make amends with those affected by tragedy.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.062
Threshold uncertainty score0.207

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0620.006

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.251 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe iJournal Student Journal of the Faculty of InformationSame topicArchaeological Research and ProtectionFrench-language works237,207