Network Dimensions in the Getty Provenance Index

In this article we make a case for a systematic application of complex network science to study art market history and more general collection dynamics. We reveal social, temporal, spatial, and conceptual network dimensions, i.e. network node and link types, previously implicit in the Getty Provenance Index (GPI). As a pioneering art history database active since the 1980s, the GPI provides online access to source material relevant for research in the history of collecting and art markets. Based on a subset of the GPI, we characterize an aggregate of more than 267,000 sales transactions connected to roughly 22,000 actors in four countries over 20 years at daily resolution from 1801 to 1820. Striving towards a deeper understanding on multiple levels we disambiguate social dynamics of buying, brokering, and selling, while observing a general broadening of the market, where large collections are split into smaller lots. Temporally, we find annual market cycles that are shifted by country and obviously favor international exchange. Spatially, we differentiate near-monopolies from regions driven by competing sub-centers, while uncovering asymmetries of international market flux. Conceptually, we track dynamics of artist attribution that clearly behave like product categories in a very slow supermarket. Taken together, we introduce a number of meaningful network perspectives dealing with historical art auction data, beyond the analysis of social networks within a single market region. The results presented here have inspired a Linked Open Data conversion of the GPI, which is currently in process and will allow further analysis by a broad set of researchers.

[1]  Tim Costello,et al.  Connecting to Data , 2020 .

[2]  Ming Chen,et al.  A Survey on Named Entity Recognition , 2019, CSPS.

[3]  Maximilian Schich,et al.  Special Section: Arts, Humanities and Complex Networks 2015: Introduction , 2017, Leonardo.

[4]  Matthew Lincoln,et al.  The Temporal Dimensions of the London Art Auction, 1780–1835 , 2016 .

[5]  Maximilian Schich Figuring Out Art History , 2015, 1512.03301.

[6]  L. Manovich Data Science and Digital Art History , 2015 .

[7]  Piotr Adamczyk The Google Cultural Institute: Tools for Libraries, Archives, and Museums , 2015, JCDL.

[8]  Markus Krötzsch,et al.  Wikidata , 2014, Commun. ACM.

[9]  Dirk Helbing,et al.  A network framework of cultural history , 2014, Science.

[10]  Z. Wang,et al.  The structure and dynamics of multilayer networks , 2014, Physics Reports.

[11]  M. Jacomy,et al.  ForceAtlas2, a Continuous Graph Layout Algorithm for Handy Network Visualization Designed for the Gephi Software , 2014, PloS one.

[12]  Mason A. Porter,et al.  Multilayer networks , 2013, J. Complex Networks.

[13]  Jari Saramäki,et al.  Temporal Networks , 2011, Encyclopedia of Social Network Analysis and Mining.

[14]  Ulrik Brandes,et al.  What is network science? , 2013, Network Science.

[15]  R. Ferrari The development of the art market in England: money as muse, 1730-1900 , Thomas M. Bayer and John R. Page, London: Pickering & Chatto, 2011. 288 p. ISBN 9781848930438. £60.00 /$99.00 (hardcover) , 2013 .

[16]  Chris Arney,et al.  Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning about a Highly Connected World (Easley, D. and Kleinberg, J.; 2010) [Book Review] , 2013, IEEE Technology and Society Magazine.

[17]  Maximilian Schich Netzwerke von komplexen Netzwerken in der (Kunst)Wissenschaft , 2013, Die Dynamik sozialer und sprachlicher Netzwerke.

[18]  Ginestra Bianconi,et al.  Dynamics of Ranking Processes in Complex Systems , 2012 .

[19]  Thomas U. Grund,et al.  Network Dynamics and Market Structure: The Case of Art Fairs , 2012 .

[20]  P. Fletcher,et al.  Local/Global: Mapping Nineteenth-Century London’s Art Market , 2012 .

[21]  Amit P. Sheth,et al.  Semantic Services, Interoperability and Web Applications - Emerging Concepts , 2011, Semantic Services, Interoperability and Web Applications.

[22]  John R. Page,et al.  The Development of the Art Market in England: Money as Muse, 1730–1900 , 2011 .

[23]  E. David,et al.  Networks, Crowds, and Markets: Reasoning about a Highly Connected World , 2010 .

[24]  Harry Eugene Stanley,et al.  Catastrophic cascade of failures in interdependent networks , 2009, Nature.

[25]  Maximilian Schich,et al.  Revealing Matrices , 2010, Beautiful Visualization.

[26]  A. Vespignani,et al.  Economic Networks: The New Challenges , 2009, Science.

[27]  R. D’Souza,et al.  Percolation on interacting networks , 2009, 0907.0894.

[28]  Tim Berners-Lee,et al.  Linked Data - The Story So Far , 2009, Int. J. Semantic Web Inf. Syst..

[29]  Mark E. J. Newman,et al.  Power-Law Distributions in Empirical Data , 2007, SIAM Rev..

[30]  Melanie Mitchell,et al.  Complexity - A Guided Tour , 2009 .

[31]  Valentin Jijkoun,et al.  Named entity normalization in user generated content , 2008, AND '08.

[32]  A. Barabasi,et al.  The human disease network , 2007, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

[33]  Satoshi Sekine,et al.  A survey of named entity recognition and classification , 2007 .

[34]  Franco Moretti Graphs, Maps, Trees: Abstract Models for a Literary History , 2005 .

[35]  G. Caldarelli,et al.  A Network Analysis of the Italian Overnight Money Market , 2005 .

[36]  R. Gorvett Why Stock Markets Crash: Critical Events in Complex Financial Systems , 2005 .

[37]  M. Newman Power laws, Pareto distributions and Zipf's law , 2005 .

[38]  Petra Perner,et al.  Data Mining - Concepts and Techniques , 2002, Künstliche Intell..

[39]  A. Barabasi,et al.  Bose-Einstein condensation in complex networks. , 2000, Physical review letters.

[40]  Michael J. A. Berry,et al.  Data mining techniques - for marketing, sales, and customer support , 1997, Wiley computer publishing.

[41]  G. Guerzoni Reflections on historical series of art prices: Reitlinger's data revisited , 1995 .

[42]  Laurian M. Chirica,et al.  The entity-relationship model: toward a unified view of data , 1975, SIGF.