MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415613175 · doi:10.29173/spectrum310

GLASS OF THE TITANS

2025· article· fr· W4415613175 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christina M. Lyon

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Architecture and Urbanism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPaintingSubject (documents)Subject matterPower (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1833 painting The Titan’s Goblet by Thomas Cole stands out as an oddity from his portfolio; its subject matter is strange, and many different historical attempts have been made to understand its meaning. However, most of them have been utterly debunked by the art history academic community. By looking at Cole’s personal views and comparing with much of his portfolio, the monumental glass depicted in this odd painting may be more clearly interpreted as a signifier of the lasting power of the Christian God over pagan gods of the past. This recognition can further help us understand the use of symbols in the works of Cole as well as his contemporaries.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.978
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.002

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.194
Teacher spread0.187 · 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.

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrumSame topicHistorical Architecture and UrbanismFrench-language works237,207