MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3118331141 · doi:10.52358/mm.vi4.142

Dialogue, dissémination et matérialisation : une entrevue avec John Durham Peters

2020· article· fr· W3118331141 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
François Cooren, John Durham Peters, Ben Peters, Nicolas Bencherki

Bibliographic record

VenueMédiations et médiatisations · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité TÉLUQUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

John Durham Peters, professeur d’anglais et d’études cinématographiques et médiatiques à l’université Yale, est connu pour ses travaux sur l’histoire des médias et de la communication. Son premier livre, Speaking into the air: A history of the idea of communication, a connu un succès mondial grâce à son regard transdisciplinaire sur la soif de l’humanité pour une communion qu’elle ne retrouve pas dans les câbles et les signaux, mais dans sa condition humaine même. Dans The Marvelous Clouds: Toward a Philosophy of Elemental Media, il invite les lecteurs à étendre leur conception des médias au-delà des seuls médias de masse. François Cooren, professeur de communication à l’Université de Montréal, a profité d’une conférence de John Durham Peters donnée à l’occasion du 40e anniversaire de son département pour s’entretenir avec lui au sujet de sa conception de la communication. Les deux hommes discutent notamment de la nécessité de dépasser l’opposition entre le monde apparemment immatériel de la communication et le monde matériel qu’elle représenterait. Benjamin Peters, professeur adjoint à l’université de Tulsa, en Oklahoma, les accompagne en partageant son intérêt pour les régimes spatiaux, temporels et de pouvoir qui se tissent autour des médias numériques.

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)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Scholarly communication, Insufficient 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.942
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.009
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.180
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.131 · 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

Citations3
Published2020
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMédiations et médiatisationsSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207