New paintings at Thompson's The City
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This solo exhibition at the City Gallery, London (Thompsons) builds upon several visual tests focused on the experimental depiction of snow, as a solid manifestation of water and its impact on the transient and refractive qualities of light within the winter landscape. This visual research continued to extend Healey’s longer term research in experimental depictions of evanescent, fleeting light conditions, particularly in the peripheral and coastal areas, including phenomena such as the aurora borealis and the ‘blue time’ in parts of Scotland and Finland. The focus of this cited outcome is also part of an ongoing dialogue with “capturing the mood of the moment†that has been explored in several exhibitions. An appraisal of this approach has been featured over four pages in the British magazine “The Artist†in November 2007 with eight featured paintings. The City Gallery exhibition, with new snow landscape approaches, was initiated and rooted in drawing. These experimental works form part of the Drawing Research Group and initiatives such as the international drawing conference in 2006: 'Drawing Board'. Keynote speakers included Mike Esson of the International Drawing Institute (IDI, comprising : College of Fine Arts, UNSW, Sydney, The China Central Academy of Fine Arts, CAFA, in Beijing and Glasgow School of Art, GSA),Healey and Deanne Petherbridge. Other linked contributions included “Drawing as reflective Practice†exhibited at Glasgow School of Art and the Air Gallery, London. In “Drawing as reflective practice†Healey’s exhibited drawings, evidenced on DVD, were part performance and part artefact. Additional dissemination of drawing work was achieved through a public lecture given at Temple University, Japan, during the duration of another show in March 2005. A catalogue of this cited exhibition in The City Gallery London was published.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.135 | 0.012 |
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".