Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article expose la construction d’un cas particulier d’hypertextualité filmique qui, sous le nom de « remake secret », entend rendre compte d’un type de réécriture indexée sur le Traumarbeit : un film source est refait par un film second qui, selon une logique onirique de condensation, de déplacement et de figurabilité, en fait apparaître la part traumatique latente ou refoulée. Inscrite dans le prolongement des travaux d’Anat Zanger (2007) et de Jean-François Buiré (2005), la notion, qui assume d’être une fiction théorique, produit de la spectature, est élaborée par l’auteure à partir des concepts de « figure » de Martin Lefebvre (1997) et de « travail du film » de Thierry Kuntzel (1975). Une étude de cas actualise le modèle : bien qu’adaptation de roman, The Grifters ( Les arnaqueurs , Stephen Frears, 1990) est analysé comme remake secret de Psycho ( Psychose , Alfred Hitchcock, 1960), reprenant en la déguisant la figure du meurtre sous la douche pour mieux rejouer et accuser, au niveau dramatique et figuratif, les complexes psychiques qui la fondent.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.065 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.016 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".