Présentation. L’interrègne : l’héritage des bonimenteurs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans ce numro thmatique sur l'hritage des bonimenteurs, nous proposons d'approfondir nos connaissances sur ce que Nol Burch qualifie d'interrgne dans l'histoire du cinma : la priode de ttonnements et d'exprimentations qui prcde l'institutionnalisation du cinma parlant entre 1927 et 1937. Ces dates sont videmment arbitraires, car on sait maintenant, notamment grce aux travaux de Valrie Pozner et Giusy Pisano (2005), que de multiples formes de sonorisation des films existaient bien avant 1927 et que, de plus, la stabilisation du mdia survient plutt la fin des annes 1930, comme l'a soulign Alain Il est cependant bien tabli que le cinma parlant tel que nous le connaissons aujourd'hui s'est impos durant cette priode, mme si les limites de cette dernire sont difficiles cerner avec prcision. De fait, nous n'excluons pas qu'il faille dborder un peu ces limites pour mieux comprendre le problme qui nous occupe ici.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.051 | 0.006 |
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".