Tag: Impressionism

Stages of Understanding Scientific Papers | December 10 2025, 19:38

As I periodically read scientific papers on my topic, I will try to articulate the levels of understanding the truth.

Level 0: “Read Later Folder” Downloaded the PDF, the title sounds genius, the abstract seems like the solution to all my problems. The file is forever buried in the ~/Downloads/Papers/ToRead folder.

Level 1: “Sumerian Cuneiform” Don’t understand anything at all. Random symbols, the Greek alphabet is over. “Orthogonal extrapolation of cognitive entropy within a quasi-stationary discourse inevitably induces a bifurcation of transcendental synergism.” Such materials really lower self-esteem. Most often from this level, you either fall back to zero, or gradually move to the second level.

Level 2: “Illusion of Competence” The Abstract is clear, the Introduction reads like a good detective story. But as soon as the main section starts, the text turns into a pumpkin. I can’t paraphrase it in my own words, only in general phrases: “Well, they trained a neural net… kind of.”

Level 3: “Formulas where needed and where not” The Abstract is clear, the first half of the article is also okay (architecture, pictures). But then comes formula (4), where “magic” happens. I take the authors’ word for it that equation (3) leads to (4) because, of course, I won’t check it. Beyond that — sheer horror and belief in a miracle.

Level 4: “Goldfish Effect” While reading — everything is crystal clear. The logic is solid, conclusions are obvious, the authors are smart. I close the tab, someone asks me, “What was the article about?” — and I freeze. My mind goes blank. If you take away the paper, I can’t reproduce even the idea because there essentially isn’t an idea, there is a process.

Level 5: “Armchair Expert” Everything’s clear, I can retell the essence over a beer. I know that Input transforms into Output, but the “black box” inside is still black. Give me a computer, I wouldn’t be able to reproduce even the skeleton because, it turns out, the article lacks half of the important stuff.

Level 6: “Critic-Practitioner” Everything is clear, I can recount, understand how to reproduce (even without their code). I see where they cut corners. I definitely know that the “state-of-the-art” result is achieved only thanks to a lucky seed or dataset and this strange trick in preprocessing, mentioned in the footnote on page 12.

Level 7: “Deconstructor” Hooray, I’ve understood everything and implemented it myself. It works worse than in the article, but I know why. However, I understand this work better than the second author (who just made charts). I see that all this complex mathematics over 5 pages boils down to two paragraphs in the middle.

Level 8: “Nirvana” The article is trivial. The idea is secondary, it was all in the ’90s with Schmidhuber, just named differently. Formulas are overcomplicated for importance. I can write the same in 10 lines of code and it will work faster. Reject.

If anything — I’m stuck somewhere between 2 and 4.

Revisiting the Sun: A New Invention in Art? | October 19 2025, 18:15

Interestingly, depicting the sun in a painting is a very recent invention. I haven’t seen a single painting in any museum where the sun is depicted above the horizon. Well, maybe with the exception of the Impressionists, Monet’s is very symbolic. In modern works, it appears more often. But in half, it’s a trace from a photograph.

Update: Turns out Aivazovsky has a lot of this. But he produced so many paintings in the studio with his students that it seems you can find any combination of little ships, waves, and sun.

Exploring Gender and Identity in Michael Davis’s “Madam XY” | August 18 2025, 14:09

We arrived in Sheperdstown yesterday, where there is a studio of a local artist, Michael Davis. His works are very interesting. In the studio, an enormous painting hangs on the whole wall, which immediately brings a smile to those somewhat versed in art, as it’s a riff on Madam X, and the artist decided to add Y — clearly alluding to transgender identity. At first, I thought it was his wife he painted (she seemed to be in charge at the studio yesterday, but perhaps they just resemble the XY model, so I didn’t ask). The strap on Madam XY has fallen, just like in Sargent’s original version before he repainted it and relocated it to avoid complete moral outrage.

A very talented artist. I will definitely visit his classes. Initially, I said “as much as 50 minutes to ride”, but now I think about it and will say “only 50 minutes to ride”.

#artrauflikes

Michael Timothy Davis Fine Art

Rediscovering Peder Severin Krøyer: The Overlooked Impressionist | July 23 2025, 22:40

I haven’t posted anything about artists in a while. Today, I want to talk about an Impressionist you’ve probably never heard of, yet he deserves to be ranked alongside Degas, Manet, Monet, and Renoir. His name is Peder Severin Krøyer, a Danish painter from the second half of the 19th century.

Interestingly, a film about his wife, Marie Triepcke, was released in 2012. She was considered the most beautiful woman in Europe, and he — at least in Denmark — the most talented painter. She was an artist too, but eventually stopped painting entirely in his shadow. According to some sources, not without the influence of her brilliant husband, who actively convinced Marie of her lack of talent.

Posts like this are grouped under the hashtag #artrauflikes, and on beinginamerica.com in the Art Rauf Likes” section you can find all 152 entries (unlike Facebook, which forgets — or ignores — nearly half of them).