MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3006228167 · doi:10.7202/1066732ar

On rit au NarKomPros : Anatoli Lounatcharski et la théorie du rire soviétique

2020· article· en· W3006228167 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Annie Gérin

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLaughterCriticismSoviet unionEnlightenmentComicsArtContext (archaeology)Art criticismSocial criticismLiteratureSociologyArt historyPhilosophyPolitical scienceHistoryPoliticsLawPerformance artEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1930 Anatoly Lunacharsky, Soviet Commissar of Enlightenment from 1917 to 1929, set up a government commission to study satirical genres in the visual arts, literature, music, theatre, and film. At the same time, he was working on the manuscript for a book entitled The Social Role of Laughter , which he never completed. Throughout his career as Commissar, Lunacharsky was instrumental in producing much satirical work through government contracts and commissions allocated to artists. During those years he also wrote art criticism and theoretical texts that encouraged Soviet artists to use humour and satire as a tool for social criticism and change in the context of the emerging Soviet Union. These writings were inspired by the prevalent theories of laughter (mainly those of Freud, Bergson, Spencer, Sully, and Lipps), revisiting them through the lens of Marxism, and translating them into a very specific Soviet language and worldview. Although they were published in Soviet journals, they remain virtually unknown. This essay examines Lunacharsky’s theoretical contribution to the study of laughter and its influence on the production of visual satire in the first decades of the Soviet Union.

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 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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.939
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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.200
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207