MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1540084702

Le héros en soi : pouvoir et cinéma

2008· article· fr· W1540084702 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphane Fauteux

Bibliographic record

VenueCommposite · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtMovie theaterArt history
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article porte sur les figures du pouvoir et la representation du lien social dans le cinema. A partir de l'etude d'un film de box-office americain, Armageddon, l'auteur propose d'examiner les representations de l'idee de « puissance » ou d'« excellence » americaine incarnee par des heros a la stature souvent mythique. En s'interessant aux « maitres » presents dans le film et aux roles sociaux qu'ils sont amenes a jouer, l'auteur montre comment ils renvoient a un modele ideal de liens sociaux. L'auteur explique comment la figure du « heros » se deploie au sein d'institutions et organisations cheres a l'Amerique : la famille, l'armee, le complexe technoscientifique, le gouvernement et bien sur l'eglise. Derriere les images proposees, ce sont les representations du pouvoir et plus specifiquement ses manifestations a travers une fantasmatique nommee ici « reel fantasme » qui sont interrogees. Y a-t-il un lien a faire entre fiction et realite ? En quoi le cinema « hollywoodien » peut-il contribuer a la valorisation de la technosociete ? L'article propose d'esquisser une reponse a ces questions a travers une reflexion sur le pouvoir, sur ses representations incarnees dans la figure du heros pour, en bout de ligne, questionner la relation entre cinema hollywoodien et nature du lien social.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.195 · 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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommpositeSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207