La Revue internationale de filmologie et la genèse de la sociologie du cinéma en France
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article qui suit vise à évaluer, du point de vue de l’histoire des sciences, la contribution de la Revue internationale de filmologie au développement de la sociologie du cinéma en France, au moyen d’une lecture chronologique de l’ensemble des numéros parus. Il fait état de la diversité des réseaux scientifiques et des types d’investissements intellectuels qui motivent l’émergence d’un discours sociologique sur le cinéma au sein de cette revue. Il analyse l’ancrage de la « sociologie du cinéma » défendue par Georges Friedmann et Edgar Morin dans le contexte épistémologique de la sociologie française de l’après Seconde Guerre mondiale et, notamment, dans la réinterprétation anthropologique de l’héritage durkheimien opérée par Marcel Mauss. Il précise, enfin, la manière dont la vulgarisation d’une vision sociologique critique de la consommation culturelle a constitué, en France, un obstacle à la reconnaissance de la valeur heuristique de cette sociologie du cinéma jusqu’à sa récente réhabilitation.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".