Auctorialité en partage : réappropriation de la pop culture chez Olivier Choinière et le Wooster Group
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se penchera sur la manière dont Olivier Choinière (Québec) et le Wooster Group (États-Unis) font usage de la pop culture dans leurs spectacles pour concevoir des assemblages singuliers, leur posture de créateurs glisse vers celle d’agenceurs d’objets culturels hétéroclites. La notion d’auctorialité se brouille, car elle se trouve télescopée entre le geste d’instauration de l’oeuvre scénique, et celui qui renvoie à la multiplication de citations des références pop — elles-mêmes mettant à mal l’attribution à un auteur unique. Leur posture s’apparente alors à celle du prosumer, conjuguant les gestes de production et de réception des objets esthétiques. Les valeurs d’originalité et d’authenticité de leurs voix de créateurs se décèlent alors dans les mouvements de sélection et de recadrage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".