MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2033178377 · doi:10.7202/1006723ar

Pour une poétique de la diffraction de l’oeuvre littéraire numérique

2011· article· fr· W2033178377 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abandonnant le fanatisme du lecteur-auteur dans un environnement centré sur les hyperliens, l’expérimentation littéraire en ligne connaît depuis le tournant du millénaire une diversification de ses manifestations et de ses formes ; on y cherche moins à affirmer les traits de l’hypertextualité qu’à construire avec la dématérialisation propre au numérique. Cet article s’intéresse à la transformation de la notion d’oeuvre dans ce contexte, à la lumière d’une réflexion sur la composition, la mise en recueil et la fragmentation. Il met à l’épreuve l’hypothèse selon laquelle plusieurs oeuvres d’écrivains actuels s’élaborent dans un double mouvement de diffraction des contenus et d’accumulation archivistique, estompant ainsi l’identité propre de chacun des projets esthétiques au profit d’une saisie stratifiée et réticulée d’une oeuvre-archive mosaïquée. Les sites Le Tiers Livre de François Bon et Désordre de Philippe De Jonckheere constituent des exemples types de cette exploration d’une démarche créative arrimée au numérique, sous l’égide de la mémoire, de la remobilisation, de la photographie et de la fabulation.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
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 score0.843
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.153 · 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