Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous proposons une reflexion theorique concernant le role des fictions televisuelles dans la representation et la construction de l’identite culturelle. Nous tentons surtout de reactualiser cette reflexion en tenant compte du contexte mediatique actuel caracterise par l’avenement d’une culture televisuelle transnationale. La circulation de plus en plus transnationale des œuvres et l’adaptation frequente de formats televisuels etrangers amenent en effet a repenser la maniere dont les fictions televisuelles peuvent aujourd’hui contribuer a representer et a construire l’identite culturelle. Nous montrons que malgre l’important mouvement de globalisation de la production mediatique, les fictions televisuelles actuellement produites vehiculent neanmoins des discours identitaires distincts. Enfin, ces identites que les fictions televisuelles peuvent contribuer a former deviennent de plus en plus delocalisees et hybrides. This article examines the role of fictional television programs for the representation and construction of cultural identity. We try to update this reflection by taking into account the current media context, which is characterized by the rise of a transnational television culture. Today, the transnational circulation of television productions and the adaptation of foreign television formats force us to question the way fictional television programs can represent and construct cultural identities. Despite the globalization of media production, contemporary fictional television shows still offer identity discourses that are distinct and specific. However, cultural identities are more delocalized and hybrid, due in part to this transnational circulation of contemporary television programs.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.020 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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; 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".