MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944100417 · doi:10.4000/belphegor.1647

Le chercheur face au fandom de SF : retour sur le fil M

2019· article· fr· W2944100417 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueBelphégor · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFandomArtHumanitiesTheologyPhilosophyLiterature

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’érudition des fans de science-fiction s’est vigoureusement exprimée dans le champ littéraire français, dans la revue Fiction d’abord, puis dans des encyclopédies, et enfin sur des supports numériques tels que le forum d’ActuSF. C’est à partir de ce dernier que nous proposons de réfléchir à l’érudition des amateurs en science-fiction, en particulier en nous fondant sur le cas exceptionnel d’un fil de discussion alimenté entre le 28 octobre 2009 et le 17 octobre 2010, intitulé « Du Sense of Wonder à la SF métaphysique ». Ce fil de discussion a attiré de nombreux intervenants, souvent des érudits majeurs, mais de toute façon des fans et connaisseurs. L’ironie et la provocation n’y ont pas tout à fait pris le dessus sur l’argumentation et la démonstration, si bien qu’il représente un modèle remarquable de la réflexion collective en science-fiction.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.675
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.003
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.248
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.048 · 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