MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109042647 · doi:10.7202/018808ar

Figures de surface média

2008· article· fr· W2109042647 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Dreamlife of Letters , poème cinétique de Brian Kim Stefans, fait partie des créations numériques les plus commentées du Web. Les hésitations des critiques quant à l’inscription de ce poème dans la tradition concrète ou lettriste interpellent autant que le caractère souvent très généraliste des commentaires. À travers une lecture détaillée des premières minutes de The Dreamlife of Letters , il s’agit d’abord dans cet article d’identifier des « figures de surface média » de la poésie numérique. Afin de rendre sensibles certaines proximités entre les figures du discours classiques et les figures de surface média, des emprunts aux taxinomies classiques sont faits dans certains cas. Pour éviter les analogies trop téméraires, et aussi pour exclure d’emblée toute confusion entre « effets » et « figures » de la poésie numérique, une nouvelle terminologie est proposée dans d’autres cas. Cette taxinomie a comme but de caractériser avec précision la relation entre le contenu des mots et leur mise en mouvement. En conclusion, il s’agit de réfléchir sur l’inscription de ces formes de poésie cinétique dans les mouvements de la poésie d’avant-garde.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.269
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.355
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.034 · 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