MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2299587546 · doi:10.4000/elh.267

Plonk & Replonk, le pastiche de l’histoire

2012· article· fr· W2299587546 on OpenAlexaff
Bertrand Tillier

Bibliographic record

VenueÉcrire l histoire · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsNovelis (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plonk & Replonk élaborent des images relevant de la chronique événementielle, où la nostalgie est cultivée jusqu’à l’absurde et où le sépia des cartes postales 1900 est détourné en « féeries » dérisoires et navrantes. Selon une pratique volontairement grossière du trucage proche du collage, ils proposent des compositions subversives qui sont des pastiches de la peinture d’histoire et de l’image de propagande moderne, qu’ils travestissent littéralement à des fins comiques et dont ils critiquent les procédés mis à nu. Leurs illustrations ont paradoxalement le pouvoir de créer des événements qui n’ont pas existé, dans une économie du carnaval.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.027
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.188 · 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 designNot applicable
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉcrire l histoireSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207