{"content":[{"text":"All following works have been presented at the online minisymposium Mathematics and \n Arts at the annual meeting of the German Mathematical Society in 2020. Despite the more \n than 130-year history of the German Mathematical Society, this minisymposium was the \n first to establish a connection to arts within the context of an annual meeting. Four sessions \n with 12 talks investigated Mathematical Learning from Artistic Procedures, The Artistic \n Object as Learning Inspiration, Imaging Statistics and Statistics of Images, and Symmetry \n and Geometry. Being held online with a reduced registration fee, the minisymposium \n allowed for presentations from a very diverse range of speakers from three continents, \n featuring talks from students, teachers and professionals alike. A selection of talks can be \n accessed here. \n The following contributions are specifically interesting for the w/k audience as they all \n report on the work of art-related scientists. Not only do the articles exemplify all relevant \n cases of interaction (cases 1–4), but they also display the non-exclusiveness and overlaps \n within the scheme. \n Anna M. Hartkopf and René M. Broeders discuss a performance based on the abstract \n mathematical concept of dimensionality (case 1). In contrast, Katharina Hahn considers \n statistical frequencies of image occurrences in photo books (case 4) and illustrates them \n through a collage that goes back to the original image entities (case 1). David Honda also \n creates an illustration, namely that of an eleven-holed torus, which not only manifests the \n abstract geometric object, but also gives rise to fascinating new mathematical observations \n (case 2). In comparison, the work of Joshua Holden represents the other side of the coin as \n he explores a weaving technique using a mathematical model to unleash the full potential of \n the technique (case 3). Finally, Loe Feijs considers the oeuvre of Piet Mondrian to provide a \n mathematical rationale how the paintings are structured (case 4). His findings not only give \n rise to mathematical results, but also provide the readers with insights about Mondrian as an \n artist (case 3). Both this project and Joshua Holden's project show the diversity that can \n occur even within the subfields of the defined scheme. Indeed, both clearly fall within case \n 3, with an artistic input as well as output and a mathematical method. Yet, Holden’s project \n produces artistic media, while Feijs's project is more of an artistic study, with critical or \n perhaps historical means. The ability to highlight these nuances shows the capacity of the \n interaction model presented.","bbox":{"left":0.128674,"top":0.086125,"width":0.743792,"height":0.580585}},{"text":"References \n Burkholder, Douglas G. 2019. “The 2018 Joint Mathematics Meetings exhibition of \n mathematical art.” Journal of Mathematics and the Arts 13 (3): 288–300.","bbox":{"left":0.128674,"top":0.688579,"width":0.6766160000000001,"height":0.053437999999999986}},{"text":"Collins, https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/method, accessed April 16th, \n 2021.","bbox":{"left":0.128674,"top":0.763885,"width":0.7394070000000001,"height":0.03467100000000001}},{"text":"Heckhausen, Heinz. 1972. “Discipline and Interdisciplinarity”. In Interdisciplinarity. \n Problems of Teaching and Research in Universities, edited by Apostel, L., Berger, G., \n Briggs, A., & Michaud, G., 83–88. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and \n Development (OECD).","bbox":{"left":0.128674,"top":0.820425,"width":0.701773,"height":0.07220500000000007}}],"images_bbox":[],"images_bbox_not_text_overlap":[]}