Exclusion et pouvoir: Formes et forces de l'occulte dans les cinémas d'Afrique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose une réflexion sur les possibilités et les modalités de représentation de "l'invisible" à l'écran. À partir de la sémiologie de l'image et des théories anthropologiques, il cerne les discours que dégagent des films africains sur un phénomène dont l'interprétation cinématographique oscille entre simplifications faciles au Burkina Faso et articulations plus nuancées au Cameroun. L'intérêt de l'étude ne réside pas seulement dans la détermination des limites de la "rationalité" cartésienne ou "scientifique" d'une pratique banale de la modernité. Elle révèle surtout les formes par lesquelles des films "montrent," "donnent à voir" l'invisible, offrant ainsi une autre manière d'approcher des dynamiques sociales qui permettent à des citoyens désabusés de prendre en charge leur destin dans un contexte où l'État, qu'on ne cherche plus à combattre, est absent.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".