Bibliographic record
Abstract
This essay analyzes three approaches to art education taken under the last Bourbon kings. The first, la petite pension du Roi (ca. 1683-1747), provided monthly stipends to promising but financially disadvantaged students of the Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture so that they might better concentrate on their work. The second, l’École royale des élèves protégés (1748-1775), was a three-year residential program to prepare a revolving group of six students who had received First Grands Prix to better understand the masterworks they would copy and emulate in Rome. The third, the petite école des élèves-artistes (1777-1790), was a residential program for an evolving group of twelve youngsters between 10 and 19 years of age judged to have a disposition for the arts. In each case, the ultimate goal was to create fine artists who would rival those of Italy and prove worthy of replacing those whom Death had seized from the Académie (“ceux que la mort raviroit à l’Académie”). Were these goals met? or, to put it another way, did the Crown invest wisely?
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".