Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exploité le plus souvent dans la littérature et le cinéma, mais aussi expérience parfois réelle, le jeu de la roulette russe fascine l’observateur en ce qu’il offre au regard une expérience de toute puissance et touche aux fantasmes les plus archaïques. La roulette russe rassemble en un cliché, un instantané, toutes les composantes du dépassement que la notion de risque implique. Les limites qu’il s’agit de franchir pour le risqueur peuvent se circonscrire autour des grands thèmes faisant énigme à l’humanité, c’est-à-dire la mort et la sexualité. C’est ainsi que nous sommes invités à rapprocher cette expérience de la psychopathologie par le truchement de la mélancolie et de la perversion. Ce jeu peut tout autant être compris comme une forme prototypique du risque, tant la mise en danger auquel il donne lieu ne se justifie d’aucun mouvement sublimatoire. Comprendre l’enjeu de la roulette russe éclaire ainsi la clinique du risque, mais aussi ses formes plus éloignées telles qu’elles peuvent apparaître dans la clinique des addictions.
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 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.001 |
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.
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".