Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le film Sisters de Brian de Palma aborde d’abord la thématique du double et du dédoublement à travers la figure des sœurs siamoises, figure qui appartient au registre du monstrueux. Il s’agit de deux sœurs qui sont de vraies jumelles : apparemment, nous avons affaire à deux fois la même personne, les deux sœurs sont le double l’une de l’autre, mais en réalité, deux identités émergentes. En plus d’être jumelles, elles sont siamoises : ce sont deux corps inséparés qui communiquent. Ce qu’il y a de monstrueux chez elles, c’est qu’elles résultent d’un processus de dédoublement qui est demeuré inachevé. La reprise d’Hitchcock par De Palma se fait sur le mode de la démultiplication, mais elle s’opère aussi sur le mode de la littéralisation : la multiplication des images à travers les fenêtres de (RW ) est ainsi reprise par De Palma sous la forme du split screen, moment d’agilité technique qui deviendra la « marque » du réalisateur.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".