MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2106474568 · doi:10.7202/024813ar

Agencement et cinéma : la pertinence du modèle discursif en question

2007· article· fr· W2106474568 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marion Froger

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Critical Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArtPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le présent article vise à rouvrir, après Metz, la question de la discursivité filmique, dans la perspective des études intermédiatiques, en retraçant les pistes anti-discursives que propose Deleuze pour aborder la question de l'image pensante. Il s'est agi de dégager un mode de pensée qui ne relèverait pas du discours, mais des agencements que Deleuze repère dans toute production de sens. À la lumière de cette approche, l'intermédialité a été comprise comme travail des matières d'expression entre elles, dans les termes d'une pensée du devenir, telle que la privilégie Deleuze.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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 score0.018
Threshold uncertainty score0.071

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.042
Scholarly communication0.0180.015
Open science0.0020.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.242 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiquesSame topicFrench Literature and Critical TheoryFrench-language works237,207