MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016010510 · doi:10.7202/1068330ar

Erin Manning et Brian Massumi, Pensée en acte : vingt propositions pour la recherche-création, Dijon : Les presses du réel, 2018, 135 pp. (relié) 12 € ISBN 9782378960391

2019· article· fr· W3016010510 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Benoît Jodoin

Bibliographic record

VenueRACAR Revue d art canadienne · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityUniversities Art Association of CanadaYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesArt historyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Erin Manning et Brian Massumi, Pensée en acte : vingt propositions pour la recherche-création, Dijon : Les presses du réel, 2018, 135 pp. (relié) 12 € ISBN 9782378960391. An article from journal RACAR : Revue d'art canadienne / Canadian Art Review (Stay Still: Past, Present, and Practice of the Tableau Vivant), on Érudit.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.951
Threshold uncertainty score0.183

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0110.014
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0550.028

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 head0.301
GPT teacher head0.308
Teacher spread0.007 · 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
GenreReview

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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRACAR Revue d art canadienneSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207