Bibliographic record
Abstract
From Berlin-Chantiers, Regine Robin’s fictional writing puts apart the memorial romance of subaltern subjects in favor of a tough and lonely discourse. The narrative scenarios which Robin proposes in “Cybermigrances” and “L'immense fatigue des pierres” are much closer to one of Gibson's “Neuromancer” than the “Madeleine” of Proust. Should we regret the time of analog memory, important to Apollinaire, considering the preference for scientific-fictional timelessness of the digital world? Although this writer nourishes an explicit fascination with nuclei and ramifications of web, L'immense fatigue des pierres is not limited to such device. Regine Robin gives us a detailed reflection on the widespread catatonic of our contemporary spaces, evidenced by the numerous descriptions of Berlim in his most “representation” of Berlin is the tortured palimpsest. Considering the impossible mourning for the missing of the Shoah, it is necessary to “build” (in Thomas Bernhard’ words in “Corrections”), before the web screen that brings the subject to his loneliness, a site for the living ruins. --- Original in French.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.002 |
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".