MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042141784 · doi:10.1515/sem-2019-0059

En complément à la géocritique et la géopolitique, la géoesthétique : L’influence des lieux sur la réception sémiotique

2020· article· fr· W3042141784 on OpenAlexaff
Arthur Poirier-Roy

Bibliographic record

VenueSemiotica · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSpatial and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Cet article a pour objectif d’introduire la géoesthésique, une approche des sciences de la culture traitant des interactions entre l’espace et la réception sémiotique. Le tournant spatial des arts et des sciences de la fin du vingtième a inspiré la création de plusieurs nouvelles approches liées à l’espace et au territoire. La Géopoétique de Kenneth White, la Géocritique de Westphal et plus tard de Prieto et Tally, la Géoesthétique de Quirós et Imhoff et éventuellement même la géosymbolique travaillée par Mario Bédard et Christiane Lahaie (2008). C’est en remarquant l’absence, parmi toutes ces approches, d’une approche dont le point central serait, non pas l’espace, mais la réception, et son lien avec l’espace, que Louis Hébert nous a suggérer de concevoir et de rédiger les prémisses d’une telle approche. La géoesthésique serait ainsi une approche pratique et expérimentale grâce à laquelle on pourrait observer l’impact que peut avoir l’espace sur la réception sémiotique d’un élément donné ou l’influence d’une réception sémiotique donnée sur la perception d’un espace fixe.

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)0.003
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.298 · 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
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSemioticaSame topicSpatial and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207