« Personne ne va s’évader de la prison de la langue » : Galatea 2.2 de Richard Powers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, Arnaud Regnauld aborde la question de la création littéraire et de l’expérience esthétique à partir du roman de Richard Powers intitulé Galatea 2.2 . Que se passerait-il en effet si une machine pouvait réellement produire une forme pertinente d’analyse littéraire et réussir à se faire passer pour un être humain? Au-delà des questions de connaissance et de cognition, s’il n’y avait pas de différence entre le cerveau humain et un réseau neuronal, qu’est-ce que cela signifierait en matière d’expérience esthétique? L’enjeu de cet article vise à déterminer les limites de la simulation. En d’autres termes, une machine est-elle susceptible de formuler un jugement esthétique selon une logique computationnelle fondée sur le calcul?
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".