Bibliographic record
Abstract
Narcissique, le théâtre exhibe toujours son fonctionnement. Phénomène le plus abouti de métathéâtralité, le « théâtre dans le théâtre » est loin de constituer la seule manifestation d’ostension théâtrale. Si on considère le théâtre dans sa traditionnelle analogie avec le tableau, et en empruntant aux analyses de Louis Marin concernant le fond, le plan et le cadre (De la représentation), on constate que ces marqueurs de réflexivité ne sont pas spécifiques à la peinture, mais qu’ils s’appliquent aussi au texte spectaculaire. Objet regardant et regard sur cet objet, le théâtre est doué d’un double regard sur le monde et sur l’art dramatique. Loin que ces regards divergents perturbent la vision, ils la rendent au contraire beaucoup plus perçante. Réfléchi comme fait, le théâtre ne cesse pas de représenter comme signe et, à l’instar de la fonctionnalité de celui-ci, fait de la réflexivité à la fois une irrémédiable nécessité et une vertu admirable.
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 | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".