Pattern recognition research on big data algorithm-driven visual expression system for fine arts and philosophy integration in artistic creation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of artificial intelligence enables computers to not only simulate human artistic creations, but also synthesize fine art works with deeper meanings based on natural images. This study digitally parses the fusion of fine art and philosophy visual expressions, and develops a visual expression system based on the fusion of fine art and philosophy by utilizing a variety of key big data algorithms for visual expressions such as adversarial networks. Research on pattern recognition of this system in art creation is carried out through model training, recommendation performance evaluation, pattern recognition strategy application and regression analysis. The model in this paper works best when the number of nearest neighbors k=15, and the recommendation model in this paper can provide a personalized list of artwork recommendations for different people. The recognition of the system in this paper in the five dimensions of “spiritual level”, “value level”, “philosophical level”, “aesthetic level” and “technical level” is distributed between 4.24 4.55. The results of regression analysis indicated that the system in this paper can improve the artistic creation as well as pattern recognition.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".