Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les interprétations de la lumière ont parfois à faire avec la contradiction – une contradiction logiquement neutralisée ou ramassée dans une structure tensive. C’est de ces contradictions ou plus précisément des paradoxes – mettant en jeu un paradigme sociétal et sa manifestation – que nous nous proposons de traiter en privilégiant l’étude de deux oeuvres artistiques singulières : celle de Pierre Soulages, qui combine noir et lumière, et celle de James Turrell, qui joue de la densité matérielle et haptique de lumière colorée. Ces études et les débats sur la visibilité – invisibilité de la lumière et la question du paradoxe – invitent à s’interroger sur les modalités d’un « effet lumière », de l’apparaître du lumineux et de son énonciation. Ils incitent ainsi à explorer la problématique des modalités d’émergence d’un objet, celles de la saisie et de la description du sensible lumineux.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".