Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette étude porte sur les méthodes de rénovation qui se mettent en place au tournant du xxe siècle pour lancer de grandes reprises de pièces féeriques et, plus précisément, sur ce que les historiens du cinéma ont retenu comme l’une des premières intégrations du cinématographe au domaine de la mise en scène théâtrale : la projection d’un film dans la féerie La Biche au bois (Théâtre du Châtelet, 1896). En partant des propositions historiographiques formulées par David Mayer, cette recherche se fonde sur le dépouillement d’archives théâtrales qui invitent à nuancer l’effet de nouveauté qu’on serait tenté de percevoir a posteriori dans cette appropriation très précoce du cinématographe. La logique de « récupération des clous » développée par Roxane Martin permet justement de réinscrire l’utilisation du cinématographe dans la continuité des procédures de l’époque, avec le perfectionnement de techniques déjà anciennes et la reconduction de conventions bien établies.
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.041 | 0.008 |
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".