Formes de représentation, impératif d’actualité et enjeux de pouvoir sur les dispositifs numériques
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article interroge l’évolution des perceptions de la figure d’auteur par le public du fait de sa mise en scène sur les dispositifs numériques. Ces espaces, privilégiant la participation de chacun et les jeux collectifs, posent la question de l’autorité et des rapports de force se jouant au sein des textes y circulant. Le cas d’étude examiné ici, celui de la figure de J.K. Rowling sur le site internet pottermore.com , nous amène à définir l’architexte numérique comme un archi-auteur, déterminant les caractéristiques de la fonction-auteur, la posture de l’écrivain et son image dans le corps social. Nous interrogeons également la pertinence de la notion de « marque auteur » sur les dispositifs numériques, qui permettent à l’auteur d’être perçu comme une entité inaccessible chargée de l’autorité très spécifique des marques et des entreprises.
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 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".