MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983719056 · doi:10.7202/1005508ar

Questions et hypothèses à partir des systèmes d’écritures : remédiation ou plurimédialité?

2011· article· fr· W1983719056 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Philippe Despoix

Bibliographic record

VenueIntermédialités Histoire et théorie des arts des lettres et des techniques · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyPsychologyPerspective (graphical)Art

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le concept de « remédiation » a été jusqu’ici essentiellement exploré à partir des arts visuels et électroniques. Cette contribution vise à mettre en perspective historique et comparée l’idée de remédiation continue dans laquelle s’inscrirait chaque nouveau médium. En prenant pour champ d’enquête les types les plus divers de systèmes d’écriture (graphisme spatial, écritures linéarisées, systèmes idéographiques, syllabaires, alphabets, etc.), elle essaie de proposer quelques hypothèses concernant les figures selon lesquelles l’écrit peut « remédier » — ou pas — (à) la parole.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.806
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.012
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.166
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.162 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueIntermédialités Histoire et théorie des arts des lettres et des techniquesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207