Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteure propose de réfléchir sur le statut photographique du film et, plus précisément, sur les enjeux d’une « conscience d’image » ou d’une intentionnalité inscrite dans le film, laquelle peut faire jouer la « rétention avec perception » et le « ressouvenir sans perception » directe (Ricoeur). L’auteure propose de lire le film comme une série de perceptions qui résulte d’une oeuvre cognitive et a pour origine une pensée en écriture et, du côté spectatoriel, de le considérer comme une oeuvre perceptive, une oeuvre offerte à la perception et dont la compréhension dépend du recouvrement cognitif effectué pat le spectateur. Aux deux pôles, de la perception par le spectateur de l’écriture cognitive du film et de la cognition en forme de perception dans le film, le film trace le réseau d’une phénoménalité.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".