MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125322484 · doi:10.7202/1013372ar

Maurice Bulbulian et l’art du langage

2012· article· fr· W2125322484 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Martin Jalbert

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicContemporary art, education, critique
Canadian institutionsCégep Marie-Victorin
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La production cinématographique du documentariste Maurice Bulbulian est ici lue comme un art marqué au coin de la condition spectrale du langage, où la vérité doit toujours composer avec la coïncidence entre relation et non-relation (Derrida, Rancière). Cet art du langage ne donne pas des documentaires dont les images seraient dotées du pouvoir de résumer une histoire ou de faire parler ce qui se tait, mais un cinéma accueillant des êtres de langage dépourvus de pouvoir dans l’ordre du monde et se constituant, à la faveur des mots, comme sujets politiques capables d’identifier les torts collectifs qui les concernent. Or, les films du cinéaste sont aussi faits de la puissance du montage par lequel le mensonge toujours possible des apparences et des mots se transforme en « vérité » (Bulbulian). Par le montage, les films parviennent à faire résonner les discours dans l’évidence de ce qui est montré à l’écran et à ainsi faire concurrence à la condition spectrale des mots, cette condition d’entités détachées de tout corps de vérité. Cet art contradictoire permet de situer le cinéma politique de Bulbulian par rapport à d’autres pratiques du cinéma direct québécois (Perrault, Leduc, Falardeau).

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

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 studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.040
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiquesSame topicContemporary art, education, critiqueFrench-language works237,207