MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970554056 · doi:10.15353/kinema.vi.1069

Berlinale 2004 Report

2004· article· en· W2970554056 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ron Holloway

Bibliographic record

VenueKinema A Journal for Film and Audiovisual Media · 2004
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicCinema and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFavouriteCultHollywoodGeorge (robot)Art historyPerformance artArtPeriod (music)HistoryPhilosophyTheologyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

BERLINALE 2004 "IF I had a choice, the Retrospective would be the Competition!" - quipped Dieter Kosslick at the opening of the 54th Berlinale (5-15 February 2004), his third as festival director. Titled "New Hollywood 1967-1976," and inspired by film historian Peter Biskind's bestseller "Easy Riders, Raging Bulls," the retro embraced the favourite films of veteran critics and film professionals attending the Berlinale. Indeed, the run on tickets for legendary films by cult directors - Roger Corman's Wild Angels (1966), Arthur Penn's Bonnie and Clyde (1967), John Cassavetes's Faces (1968), Dennis Hopper's Easy Rider (1969), Sam Peckingpah's Wild Bunch (1969), Bob Rafelson's Five Easy Pieces (1969), Peter Bogdanovich's Last Picture Show (1971), William Friedkin's French Connection (1971), Jack Nicholson's Drive, He Said (1971), Francis Ford Coppola's Godfather (1972), Brian De Palma's Sisters (1972), Terrence Malick's Badlands (1973), George Lucas's American Graffiti (1973), Hal Ashby's Last Detail (1973), Steven Spielberg's...

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Editorial · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.542
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.000
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.5420.323

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.272
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEditorial

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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKinema A Journal for Film and Audiovisual MediaSame topicCinema and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207