MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1988697939 · doi:10.7202/1000963ar

L’image du cinéma dans les romans canadiens-français de 1896 à 1930

2011· article· fr· W1988697939 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Micheline Tremblay

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteure retrace ici la place qu’occupe le cinéma dans la littérature et relève les jugements dont il fait l’objet. Dès son arrivée au Canada français, le cinéma attire les foules. Pourtant, les oeuvres romanesques témoignent peu de cet engouement pour le cinéma. Rares sont les romanciers dont les personnages fréquentent les salles obscures. C’est que le cinéma apparaît en relation avec tout ce qui s’oppose à l’idéologie dominante : c’est un phénomène urbain, américain, et qui propage des valeurs immorales aux yeux des groupes dominants des sociétés civile et politique. Point étonnant, donc, qu’un lourd discrédit social pèse contre le cinéma.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.478
Threshold uncertainty score0.961

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0120.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiquesSame topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207