MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W349918475 · doi:10.3138/cjfs.19.2.43

Two Kinds of Darkness: Jean-Luc Nancy and the Community of Cinema

2010· article· fr· W349918475 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Thomas Stubblefield

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Film Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophical and Theoretical Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesMovie theaterEthnologyArtSociologyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En dépit de l’importance qu’elle a dans l’expérience du cinéma, l’étude de l’espace social que constitue la salle de projection a longtemps été, en études cinématographiques, subordonnée à la lecture des “textes” filmiques. Alors que depuis une dizaine d’années, les chercheurs ont essayé de mettre en lumière la compréhension de cet espace, pour la plupart, les recherches ont ignoré le discours potentiellement intéressant, émergeant au même moment en philosophie, ayant trait au problème de la communauté. Cet article utilisera la conception qu’a Jean-Luc Nancy de la « communauté inopérante » pour initier un dialogue entre les théories du spectateur cinématographique et les recherches philosophiques sur la conception de la communauté. Cette convergence servira à revisiter la compréhension habituelle de la fonction idéologique de l’expérience du cinéma en salle commerciale et aussi à jeter une lumière nouvelle sur les modes alternatifs d’exploitation qui remettent en question cette expérience. Cette dernière discussion mettra l’accent sur MobMov, un groupe international de projectionnistes amateurs qui utilisent la technologie mobile et l’Internet pour organiser des projections dans certains coins oubliés des villes.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.248
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.010
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.031
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Film StudiesSame topicPhilosophical and Theoretical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207