MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4381946479 · doi:10.4000/crcv.26830

Versailles and Dresden: Myths and Models

2023· article· en· W4381946479 on OpenAlexaff
Maureen Cassidy-Geiger

Bibliographic record

VenueBulletin du Centre de recherche du château de Versailles · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsStan Cassidy Foundation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyRealmExhibitionGermanResidenceArtState (computer science)Art historyRoyal familyHistoryLawHumanitiesClassicsSociologyPolitical sciencePoliticsArchaeologyDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notwithstanding some pioneering exhibitions and publications in recent years, art historians who study the reigns of Augustus the Strong and Augustus III typically focus their attention on the electoral court in Dresden, with little consideration of the broader Saxon-Polish realm or the royal court in Warsaw. Further, there is a proclivity to view the residence of the Sun King at Versailles as the primary model for the court of Augustus the Strong in Dresden. Hence, there is a tendency to marginalize or even ignore the probable influence of other royal seats in France, and beyond, that were known to the Saxon princes from their respective Grand Tours, or from state visits, as when Augustus the Strong was at the Prussian court in 1709 and 1728. Even if some have considered the silver furniture acquired for Saxony to be retardataire, as opposed to au courant, it seems there was an aspirational awareness of the representational significance of silver furnishings, whether French or German, that made such products timeless instead of antiquated. Indeed, silver was so emblematic of the wealth of the state of Saxony that miners were featured and celebrated in court festivities, as in the concluding event of the 1719 wedding, the Festival of Saturn.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.039
Scholarly communication0.0180.013
Open science0.0030.005
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.106
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.158 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBulletin du Centre de recherche du château de VersaillesSame topicHistorical Art and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207