Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il faut s’en remettre à l’évidence, le domaine de la théorie du théâtre souffre de plusieurs maux. Le premier tient à la nature même de la théorie qui a connu au cours des années 1990 un recul certain, résultat sans doute du ressac qui a accompagné la fin des discours dominants au centre de la réflexion des années 1960 et 1970. Le second tient au soupçon généralisé et toujours actuel qui affecte toute approche théorique dès lors que celle-ci prend pour champ d’application la création artistique. Cette rupture radicale peut-elle s’expliquer et, plus encore, peut-elle se dépasser? Ce texte tente un tel rapprochement en posant comme hypothèse que la réflexion théorique et la création artistique portent en leur coeur un même principe de fonctionnement : ils traduisent le monde. Vaste principe à partir duquel Antoine Vitez voit le travail du metteur en scène et que cet article applique aussi par analogie au domaine de la théorie.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.047 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".