MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2996328008 · doi:10.7202/1065523ar

Le XXIe siècle ou la séparation achevée. Éthique et technologie dans Anima Motrix d’Arno Bertina

2019· article· fr· W2996328008 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Julien Jeusette

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes littéraires · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophical and Theoretical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

De Warburg à Agamben en passant notamment par Debord et Baudrillard, nombreux sont les intellectuels qui ont alerté leurs contemporains sur les risques de la technologie : celle-ci nous séparerait les uns des autres et nous mettrait à distance du monde. Or, il est évident qu’au XXIe siècle, cette séparation prend une tournure plus dramatique. Nous suggérons ici qu’Anima Motrix, le roman d’Arno Bertina paru en 2006, permet de mieux comprendre les dangers de l’emprise des dispositifs sur nos vies ; à partir d’un cas extrême, l’écrivain nous invite à penser le potentiel inhumain de notre temps.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

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 studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes littérairesSame topicPhilosophical and Theoretical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207