Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet essai examine le film de Stanley Kubrick 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) à la lumière de méthodes qui sont en phase avec le romantisme européen. Dans une telle perspective, l’utilisation d’une imagerie abstraite et d’une chronologie non linéaire reconfigure le mode de réception du film pour en souligner certains phénomènes typiquement romantiques tels que le renouvellement de la perception, la transcendance temporelle et le sublime. Puisque ces qualités sont généralement associées au cinéma expérimental américain — un genre lié de façon explicite aux films de Kubrick — leur présence dans un film-spectacle de science-fiction à gros budget remet en question notre capacité à définir 2001 comme un film narratif et mimétique au sens usuel du terme. Au bout du compte, ces éléments convergent vers une façon de regarder le film comme une allégorie évolutionniste complexe qui implique le spectateur dans son canevas symbolique, lecture du film soutenue par les théorisations du cinéma faites par Gilles Deleuze, Fredric Jameson et plusieurs autres.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".