Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le cinema quebecois connait presentement un vif succes, tant aupres du public que de la critique. On en connait cependant peu sur le contenu des films quebecois et sur ce qui se passe derriere l'ecran, en amont de l'œuvre filmique. Dans le premier tome, L'imaginaire filmique, Christian Poirier propose une analyse interpretative de l'ensemble de la production filmique quebecoise. Quelles images de la societe les cineastes projettent-ils? L'auteur met au jour deux recits identitaires: un recit de l'empechement et de l'eclatement, et un recit de l'enchantement et de l'accomplissement. Ainsi, les films quebecois explorent inlassablement, par un jumelage etroit de l'individuel et du collectif, des territoires identitaires et politiques en mouvement. Dans le deuxieme, intitule Les politiques cinematographiques, l'auteur trace l'historique de l'intervention gouvernementale quebecoise et canadienne en matiere de cinema et examine les principales composantes de l'industrie du film au Quebec, les acteurs politiques en cause, les groupes d'interet mobilises et les orientations privilegiees. De quelle latitude disposent donc les Etats quebecois et canadien dans un environnement ou s'accentue la reference aux industries culturelles, a la liberalisation des marches et a la competition avec les produits hollywoodiens? Ces ouvrages s'adressent autant aux cinephiles qu'aux chercheurs interesses, de pres ou de loin, a la societe quebecoise, a ses questionnements et a son evolution.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.001 |
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.
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".