MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1493458056 · doi:10.21083/csieci.v5i1.991

L’improvisation comme processus d’individuation

2009· article· fr· W1493458056 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Christian Béthune

Bibliographic record

VenueCritical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisation · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophical and Theoretical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyImprovisationIndividuationPsychoanalysisPsychologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’attitude philosophique se caractérise par la promotion de l’herméneutique. En effet, avec l’irruption de la philosophie, le sens se conçoit comme une réalité autonome ; au nom de cette autonomie, la pensée occidentale va privilégier l’interprétation au détriment de l’action. Or, si l’improvisation fait problème, c’est qu’elle remet en cause, par sa pratique, la pertinence de cette disjonction, objet pourtant d’un large consensus. Dès lors c’est la genèse du sujet (ou processus d’individuation) qui doit être reconsidérée. Dans la mesure où les « théories de l’art » ont emboîté le pas à la philosophie, ce sont les concepts clés de l’esthétique (œuvre, auteur, création, contemplation etc.) que la pratique de l’improvisation et –singulièrement de l’improvisation jazzistique – vient remettre en cause. Il ne s’agit donc pas de repositionner l’improvisation dans la perspective traditionnelle de l’esthétique, mais plutôt de montrer l’inadéquation des catégories de l’esthétique à comprendre l’improvisation. Dans ce travail critique la philosophie de l’individuation proposée par Gilbert Simondon et sa réinterprétation telle qu’elle nous est proposée par Gilles Deleuze et Félix Guattari constituent des outils privilégiés.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.042
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.142
GPT teacher head0.401
Teacher spread0.259 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritical Studies in Improvisation / Études critiques en improvisationSame topicPhilosophical and Theoretical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207