MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2088888671 · doi:10.7202/006366ar

Médiation et praxis dans un tableau d'Henri Matisse

2003· article· fr· W2088888671 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
E.F. Moore

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSemiotics and Representation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Médiation et praxis dans un tableau d'Henri Matisse Dans mon analyse détaillée de \aJeune femme au collier de perles (1942), je suggère une approche de la peinture qui la voit simultanément comme pratique, médiation (au sens de la dialectique marxiste) et conflit. Mon analyse, qui a pour but de mettre au jour les tensions qui sous-tendent l'apparente unité de l'œuvre, est à la fois formelle et idéologique dans la mesure où je partage avec M. Bakhtine, F. Gaillard et M. Fried une intuition et un postulat méthodologique anti-dualistes selon lesquels le rapport entre forme et idéologie n'est pas analogique (où la morphologie serait le signe indiciel d'un contenu référentiel pré-existant), mais homologique. Ceci suppose, pour citer Françoise Gaillard, "... la seule approche pertinente de l'idéologie en matière de texte, à savoir que le texte produit l'idéologie dont il relève ". Dans la Jeune femme au collier de perles, Matisse signifie un inachèvement qui porte la désémantisation de la figure au-delà d'une limite où le signe serait encore vu comme motivé par sa référence. J'assimile ainsi le tableau à une arène où viennent se croiser plusieurs discours, socialement motivés, sur la pratique picturale elle-même, discours que cette pratique informe et transforme.

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)0.002
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 score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.202
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.319 · 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

Citations0
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicSemiotics and Representation StudiesFrench-language works237,207