The Physics ArXiv blog serves up the kind of art-science intersection I usually link to: When A Machine Learning Algorithm Studied Fine Art Paintings, It Saw Things Art Historians Had Never Noticed.
For each painting, they limit the number of concepts and points of interest generated by their method to 3000 in the interests of efficient computation. This process generates a list of describing words that can be thought of as a kind of vector. The task is then to look for similar vectors using natural language techniques and a machine learning algorithm.
Even though I like the story, I find the “unexpected links” unconvincing. They seem like similarities (presence of a chair on the left side of frame) that are more coincidental effects of design choices. What is more interesting is to see how much the coded “vectors” correspond to the expert knowledge of art historians.