MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7070866974

A Roman model of the Baroque Festival in Lisbon: the tile panel of the Monastery of São Vicente de Fora and the Cavalcata di Posssesso of Pope Innocent X

2021· article· pt· W7070866974 on OpenAlexfundno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Repositório Aberto (Universidade Aberta) · 2021
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Art and Architecture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersFederation for the Humanities and Social Sciences
KeywordsBaroqueTileSculpture
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Durante o reinado de D. João V, as festividades relacionadas com o modelo processional atingiram um esplendor inusitado que, associado às manifestações da arte efémera, muito contribuiu para a formulação global que esta estética pretendia. Reveste-se por isso de singular importância o conjunto cerâmico reproduzindo o desfile solene da tomada de posse do Papa Inocêncio XIII em Roma, inserido nos ciclos azulejares do terraço dos claustros do Mosteiro de São Vicente de Fora. Tratando-se de uma manifestação exclusiva das práticas e ritos cerimoniais romanos2 (a Cavalcata di Possesso), a sua transposição para o meio português, veiculada por uma disciplina artística tão representativa como o azulejo narrativo a azul e branco, significava a exaltação das possibilidades da Festa barroca, a par da sua concretização em ambiente português. Tendo passado quase despercebida a existência deste núcleo, mencionado por José Queirós (1856-1920) e João Miguel dos Santos Simões (1907-1972) — este no seu Corpus sobre a Azulejaria Portuguesa do século XVIII —, temos vindo sobre ele a desenvolver uma investigação que nos permitiu identificar já as fontes gráficas e a provável autoria da sua execução, para além das riquíssimas implicações e cruzamentos culturais entre o barroco romano e a conjuntura artística portuguesa.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.349
Threshold uncertainty score0.871

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.198
Teacher spread0.177 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Repositório Aberto (Universidade Aberta)Same topicHistorical Art and Architecture StudiesFrench-language works237,207