MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1510805546 · doi:10.3917/rfea.136.0096

“A Voice That Is Not There Otherwise” : An Interview with B. R. Rich (26 June 2012)

2014· article· fr· W1510805546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Céline Murillo, Anne Hurault-Paupe

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue française d’études américaines · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQueerHumanitiesArtArt historyMovie theaterSociologyGender studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Actuellement Professeur au Film and Digital Media Department de l’Université de Californie à Santa Cruz, où elle enseigne les études cinématographiques et la pratique du documentaire, B. R. Rich a joué, depuis les années 1970, un rôle clé dans la légitimation du cinéma indépendant, qu’il soit américain ou d’autres pays. Elle a également enseigné, entre autre lieux, à l’Université de Berkeley. Militante féministe, elle a commencé sa carrière en tant que programmatrice des événements liés au cinéma au Art Institute of Chicago, puis a travaillé en tant que critique de films au Chicago Reader . Tout en continuant, jusqu’à ce jour, à contribuer régulièrement à diverses publications de la presse grand public autant que de la presse spécialisée, elle a ensuite été directrice du département cinéma du New York State Council of the Arts, ce qui lui a permis de financer expositions, salles, conférences et publications. Elle a participé à la programmation de plusieurs festivals de cinéma tels que celui de Toronto et celui de Sundance. Elle est l’auteur de Chick Flicks : Theories and Memories of the Feminist Film Movement (Duke University Press, 1998) et de New Queer Cinema : The Director’s Cut (Duke University Press, 2013). 1

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.111

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0230.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0070.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.238
Teacher spread0.194 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue française d’études américainesSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207