MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037305205 · doi:10.7202/1006729ar

Vraie fiction et faux documents

2011· article· fr· W2037305205 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Samuel Archibald

Bibliographic record

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

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’objectif de cet article est d’opérer une lecture au-dedans et au-dehors de la fiction mise en place par le cinéaste Brian Flemming dans son documentaire Nothing So Strange (GMD Studios, 2002), ainsi que dans les documents d’archive et les artéfacts web produits en son sillage. L’univers Nothing So Strange s’attache à décrire l’un des événements historiques les plus importants à n’avoir pas eu lieu au xx e siècle : l’assassinat du président de Microsoft Bill Gates. Nous tenterons de voir comment une grande oeuvre participative (au sens de Jenkins) s’est développée à partir du film de Flemming, témoignage hyperréaliste issu d’un univers parallèle ; comment cinéastes, spectateurs et internautes ont détourné la capacité documentaire de l’archive filmique et numérique afin de se réapproprier la figure historique du complot meurtrier et fournir à la fiction un grand déploiement tentaculaire. Nous interrogerons également les enjeux éthiques et esthétiques de cette stratégie, que Flemming lui-même qualifie de piratage de la réalité («reality-hacking»).

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)0.006
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 score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.075

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.008
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.004

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 head0.450
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.104 · 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

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207