MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3025744700 · doi:10.7202/1067416ar

Décrire l’artifice

2019· article· fr· W3025744700 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Carrier-Lafleur

Bibliographic record

VenueSens public · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article entend remettre en question la notion de « pan » dans le domaine des arts visuels, telle que développée par l’historien de l’art Georges Didi-Huberman dans le domaine de la peinture. À l’exemple du « petit pan de mur jaune » vermeerien remarqué par l’écrivain Bergotte dans À la recherche du temps perdu, le pan est un détail de l’œuvre qui semble exclusivement destiné à celui qui la regarde et qui n’a de sens que pour lui. Transcendante, cette vérité accorde une authenticité nouvelle à l’œuvre, devenue ainsi unique, tout en soulignant la facticité de toutes les autres œuvres qui ne possèdent pas d’« effet pan ». Plus spécifiquement, il s’agira de voir comment ces enjeux se développent lorsqu’il est question non plus de peinture ou de photographie, mais des images en mouvement de l’art cinématographique, dont il faut aussi trouver le moyen de décrire l’authentique vérité. Pour mener cet exercice d’ekphrasis, nous nous intéressons à deux fictions littéraires mettant en scène des personnages dont la vie tourne autour d’un ou de plusieurs films, devenus éminemment personnels : Ma vie rouge Kubrick (Simon Roy, 2014) et Cinéma Royal (Patrice Lessard, 2017).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.078

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.020
Scholarly communication0.0100.010
Open science0.0020.007
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.006

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 head0.247
Teacher spread0.210 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSens publicSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207