MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283650812 · doi:10.29173/cf618

De la ficelle au cercueil. Nelly Arcan sur la manière d’interpeller la vie du côté de la mort

2022· article· fr· W4283650812 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Andreea Pop

Bibliographic record

VenueConvergences francophones · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Lorsqu’elle se donna la mort en 2009, Nelly Arcan léguait une œuvre réduite mais saisissante (deux récits et deux romans), empreinte de son mal de vivre et de ses expériences d’escorte. À partir d’une convergence symbolique centrée sur son année de naissance nous proposons une lecture entrecroisée, selon les grilles avancées par Deleuze et Guattari dans Mille plateaux et par Jacques Derrida, dans La Vérité en peinture. Nous osons une approche rhizomatique de ses écrits, à la lumière de ce que serait la généalogie sérielle mise en rapport avec un mode et un monde de consommation. Lignée symbolique, horizontale et paradigmatique (au sens que lui prête Derrida), l’œuvre de Nelly Arcan s’ouvre en permanence et dialectiquement à l’objet. Son discours sur l’industrie du corps dans un monde en surproduction se donne à lire en clé marchande. Comment peut-on rattacher Arcan à une généalogie imaginaire (tribale) à travers l’écriture ? De quelle façon le corps-objet, récurrent dans les écrits de Nelly Arcan, entre-t-il dans la logique sérielle ? Et dans quelle mesure tribu et série peuvent-elles assurer une postérité ? Autant de points d’interrogations auxquels nous proposons non pas de réponses mais des prolongements rhizomatiques.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.074

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0220.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.320 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConvergences francophonesSame topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchFrench-language works237,207