Bibliographic record
Abstract
La peau trouve sa place dans les conférences organisées par l’Académie royale de peinture et de sculpture dès les premiers temps qui suivent sa création en 1648. Envisagée à la fois comme épaisseur – la structure osseuse est recouverte d’un voile de peau – et comme surface – il s’agit alors de carnation – la peau sert de référence aux rubénistes dans la querelle du coloris. L’étoffement du vocabulaire déployé à cette occasion se traduit par une poétique de la chair et de sa morbidesse favorable à la mise en place de topoï . Ceux-ci entrent en résonnance avec l’attention portée par le XVIII e siècle aux sensations et aux sentiments et se retrouvent sous la plume des salonniers comme des philosophes. Les chairs érotiquement érubescentes de la dormeuse ainsi que le rapport établi entre les pores de la peau, la surface du tableau et les impressions du spectateur constituent deux topoï révélateurs d’une nouvelle appréhension de l’œuvre impliquant l’artiste, les figures peintes et le spectateur.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.039 | 0.007 |
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".