Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The Writers’ Project Guide to Atlanta tags on to its list of artists the name of Hale Woodruff, as the city’s exponent of Negro Art. He is, of course, nothing of the kind: he is the best and best known artist in the state, and incidentally a Negro. Years ago Ralph McGill, of the Atlanta Constitution, spoke of Woodruff as a recent discovery only in Atlanta. It is likely that much of dominant Atlanta still is ignorant of his fine work. This is not likely to bother Hale much, in a city whose chief art treasures are the Diorama of the Battle of Atlanta, and such statues as Tom Watson pitching horseshoes in front of the State Capitol or Henry Grady reaching for something at Grady Square. Hale isn’t easily bothered anyway. When I talked with him in the dilapidated library building on Morris Brown’s campus, he didn’t seem abashed by the bare wreck of a place but explained to me how the dome provided ideal light for working. Later his department was moved back to the Spelman College campus. There I found him in a makeshift studio kidding with Smitty, the superintendent of buildings, wheedling him and counterblasting. Smitty is unimpressed by Hale’s international reputation, but I could see that Hale would get his walls fixed right.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.225 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".