MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2998625931 · doi:10.6092/issn.2280-9481/9863

Des portes sans clés. Des clés sans portes. Abbas Kiarostami et la promesse du passage

2019· article· en· W2998625931 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marco Dalla Gassa, Stefano Pellò

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper discusses some hermeneutical problems relating to an installation by the famous Iranian director, photographer and artist Abbas Kiarostami (1940-2016), Doors without keys, presented at the Aga Khan Museum of Toronto during the winter of 2016. The authors provide a reading based on the idea that Kiarostami’s Doors can be interpreted as a significant manifestation of the cognitive processes involved in the spectator’s experience of a contemporary art museum. In order substantiate this theory, the two parts of the article proceed in a complementary way. The first part explores some of the hermeneutical options given to the visitors, dealing especially with the “philology” of the relevant processes of cultural transfers and translations, and focusing especially to the apparently compelling, but actually non-necessary, relations with the aesthetics of classical Persian poetry. The second part locates the installation in the habitat of contemporary art, finally showing how much Doors without keys calls for an idea of the aesthetic experience which can’t be confined in any culturalist perspective: an experience revolving around the phenomenological and proprioceptive dymensions of the observer, and their creative and bewildering implications.

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 score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.055

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 studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.207
GPT teacher head0.507
Teacher spread0.301 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies→French-language works237,207→