MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2782499045 · doi:10.3138/cjfs.25.2.6

Cinema, Realism, and <i>The World</i> According to Jia Zhangke

2016· article· en· W2782499045 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Richler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Film Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMovie theaterRealismExhibitionAestheticsReading (process)PhenomenonChinaGlobalizationNational cinemaSociologyLiteratureArtMedia studiesVisual artsEpistemologyHistoryPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, I argue that while processes of globalization and digitization have complicated our idea of what constitutes “cinema” and “the world,” the idea of World Cinema is not new, but is instead foundational to the advent of film itself. More specifically, I examine Jia Zhangke’s The World (2004, China/Japan/France) as a prototypical “World Cinema” text, in order to help juxtapose the experience of film (and the sense of Bazinian realism and authenticity often attributed to it), with the phenomenon of World Exhibitions. Although I do examine the text itself in some detail, my goal is not merely to provide yet another reading of The World (of which there are many), but to articulate something more broadly about the experience of film, the panoramic discourse of World Cinema (especially via international film festivals), and the supposedly disruptive effects of digital technologies.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.009
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.202 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Film StudiesSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207