MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2166559362 · doi:10.7202/030522ar

Accord réciproque. Pierce, Kandinsky et le potentiel dynamique du qualisigne

2005· article· fr· W2166559362 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSemiotics and Representation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Une des conceptions-clefs de la sémiotique peircienne est la structure relationnelle de la représentation – relation triadique entre representamen , objet, et interprétant et entre icône, indice et symbole. Un domaine privilégié pour l’étudier est fourni par l’art abstrait moderne : Wassily Kandinsky (1866- 1944), par exemple, contemporain de Peirce (1839-1914) et sémioticien sans le savoir, comme artiste autant que comme théoricien de l’esthétique, a essayé de cerner les potentialités de la qualité pure. Cet article essayera de montrer comment la sémiotique peircienne, surtout dans le domaine de la théorie de l’iconicité, nous aide à mieux comprendre le potentiel dynamique des formes abstraites dans la peinture de Kandinsky, et de montrer comment sa théorie et sa pratique portent la marque des processus sémiotiques fondamentaux théorisés par Peirce.

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 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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.920
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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicSemiotics and Representation StudiesFrench-language works237,207