Bibliographic record
Abstract
Partant d’un questionnement sur le corps et la technologie dans les oeuvres de l’art biotech, cet article vise à problématiser l’imaginaire contemporain de la post-hominisation en exposant les contenus de cet imaginaire, les frontières qu’il explore, l’identité (humaine, hominidé) qu’il convoque à l’heure des technosciences et de leur potentiel d’altération de la « nature humaine ». Dans le but d’illustrer l’hypothèse d’une genèse technique de l’hominisation, plusieurs tableaux synthétiques – mettant notamment en relation les types de corporéité artistique dégagés (cyborgs, clones, bio-mutants, self-hybrides) avec, 1. les cas paradigmatiques en engénierie, génétique et médecine qui tissent l’imaginaire des artistes biotech, 2. les technologies les plus souvent utilisées, 3. les domaines biologiques et extra-biologiques afférents – sont proposés, invitant à une réflexion plus spécifique sur les rapports étroits qu’entretiennent artistes et scientifiques aujourd’hui.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.011 | 0.038 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".