Bibliographic record
Abstract
RésuméCe texte propose une approche à la fois descriptive, analytique et critique de la très active production patrimoniale actuellement en cours sur ONF.ca. En se donnant comme mission de rendre accessible son patrimoine audiovisuel, l’Office se soucie d’en orienter la réception, de proposer aux internautes l’histoire de son action audiovisuelle depuis sa fondation en 1939. Par le relevé d’un certain nombre de valeurs exhibées (authenticité, représentativité, renommée et proximité), et de registres privilégiés (dont celui de la commémoration), l’auteur tente de circonscrire une axiologie du patrimoine sur ONF.ca. Dans sa seconde partie, le texte se consacre à la question de l’articulation (et de l’écart) entre mémoire patrimoniale et mémoires particulières (des films) afin de mieux cerner les contours politiques et les enjeux idéologiques de l’encadrement discursif des collections. AbstractThis article offers a descriptive, analytical and critical approach to the very active production of audiovisual heritage currently underway at NFB.ca. Designed to make the National Film Board (NFB)’s audiovisual heritage more accessible, the website carefully guides its users through the history-memory of audiovisual production at the Film Board from its foundation in 1939 through to the present. By analyzing how the website showcases its films, endorsing specific values (authenticity, representativeness, recognition and proximity) and privileging certain registers (such as commemoration), the article first attempts to define an axiology of heritage in NFB.ca. The article then focuses on questions of the articulation of (and the variation between) history-memory and particular memories (of films) in order to better outline the political contours and ideological stakes of the discursive framework of the NFB’s collections.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 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".