MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2103535956 · doi:10.7202/030595ar

Kasimir Malevitch, Maurice Blanchot. Le silence de l’oeuvre

2005· article· fr· W2103535956 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Emmanuelle Ravel

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C'est sans doute le terme de « suprématiste » qui conviendrait le mieux pour décrire le travail de Maurice Blanchot à cause de ce qui se donne comme un thème récurrent dans toutes ses publications : le défi qu'il s'est lancé de considérer comme absolues les limites de la représentation. Dans l'un ou l'autre de ses ouvrages, l'abstraction du langage devient paradoxalement le genre suprême de la qualité concrète, en peinture aussi bien qu'en littérature, de sa praxis. À ce stade, les enjeux naissent de la crise qui affecte une avant-garde qui ne parvient plus à soutenir les signes de renouvellement perpétuel de la forme de sa création. Entre les années 1910 et 1913, l'aporie de la modernité conduit rapidement à la formulation de l'idée de la mort de l'art et, après la deuxième guerre mondiale, avec l'apparition de L'Espace littéraire de Blanchot, cette même aporie amène à engager la littérature dans l'expérience des limites. Cet article se propose donc d'évaluer, par le biais de la présence du silence dans l'oeuvre, le degré d'aridité qui affecte la représentation, de celle des sens en particulier, et les limites que peuvent atteindre de telles aventures.

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)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.008

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.238 · 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

Citations1
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicDiverse Cultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207