MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988270817 · doi:10.4000/critiquedart.1648

Quel est le sujet de l’autoportrait ? : Moi ?

2004· article· fr· W1988270817 on OpenAlexaff
Jacques Leenhardt

Bibliographic record

VenueCritique d’art · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsNational Museum of Fine Arts of Quebec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’ambiguïté de la formulation de ce titre saute immédiatement aux yeux. Et il faudra toute la patience de Vincent Descombes (p. 15) pour nous démontrer que si les philosophes de la modernité ont pour la plupart usé de ce concept de “sujet” à tort et à travers, l’emploi de celui-ci dans la phrase du titre est du moins correcte en fonction des critères énoncés : il est identifiable comme individu et présent dans le monde à la façon d’une puissance causale. Nous voilà rassurés : en un sens, le ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.069

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.025
Scholarly communication0.0130.023
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.261 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCritique d’artSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207