Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche porte sur la pratique de la dissimulation. Il s'agit de questionner le cache, le montre, l'apparition et la disparition de l'image et de demontrer que le cache fait partie de l' œuvre et se trouve au cœur de la creation. Comment peut-on cacher une chose et la montrer a la fois ? Est-il possible, pour un plasticien, de rendre visible des objets qui se declinent dans le domaine du non-savoir ? Le travail personnel presente dans cette these est base sur la decomposition, la fragmentation de la figure et l'effacement qui opacifie l'image par la superposition de couches de peinture. Le phenomene du suspens s'introduit dans cette pratique picturale par l'alterite, la mise en crise de l' œuvre, la presence du hasard, de l'incertain, de l'attente et de l'angoisse. L'objectif d'une telle demarche est de quitter ce que l'on voit pour ce que l'on imagine, de franchir la pellicule de peinture pour decouvrir la face cachee de l'oeuvre
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".