MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2409011378 · doi:10.7202/1035288ar

« Ceci est de l’art ». Analyse peircienne de l’image de l’art

2016· article· fr· W2409011378 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dominique Château

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sémiotiques · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSemiotics and Representation Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Je prends la phrase “Ceci est de l’art” comme une proposition singulière visant explicitement un objet précis – par exemple une toile de Manet ou l’urinoir de Duchamp. En m’appuyant sur la théorie peircienne de l’icône, et plus particulièrement du diagramme, je réfléchis sur “l’image de l’art” qui habite l’esprit de quelqu’un qui prononce cette phrase à l’endroit d’une chose déterminé, une oeuvre d’art ou ce qui en tient lieu. C’est aussi l’occasion de réfléchir sur cette idée d’une certaine image qui, habitant l’esprit de quelqu’un, actualise une relation sémiotique à visée symbolique.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.126
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.235 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sémiotiquesSame topicSemiotics and Representation StudiesFrench-language works237,207