Dynamiques de l’effondrement dans le fantastique, la fantasy et la SF
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que beaucoup appellent désormais non à prévenir une lointaine apocalypse, mais à freiner un effondrement en cours (climatique, énergétique, etc.), ce recueil applique la réflexion technique et anthropologique des collapsologues aux fictions de l’imaginaire. Fort de ce cadrage plus politique qu’eschatologique, il étudie des œuvres récentes influencées par le contexte de l’effondrement, et relit des œuvres anciennes à la lumière de cette nouvelle perspective. Les articles portent sur des œuvres littéraires, des séries télévisées, ou encore des jeux de société. Textes québécois, philippin et irlandais s’ajoutent au corpus étasunien et britannique. L’apocalypse scientifique de la fiction de la Guerre froide est confrontée aux classiques de la fantasy, et la désintégration sociopolitique aux impacts des pandémies et du changement climatique. While many now call out not to prevent a distant apocalypse, but to slow down an ongoing collapse (of climate, energy resources, etc.), this collection applies the technical and anthropological thinking of theoreticians of systemic collapse to fantastic fiction.Relying on this political rather than eschatological perspective, it explores recent productions influenced by the context of collapse, and reconsiders old works in the light of this new frame of reference.The articles examine literary works, television series, or even board games.Quebec, Filipino and Irish texts supplement the American and British corpus.The scientific apocalypse of Cold War fiction is set against the classics of high fantasy, and socio-political disintegration against the impacts of pandemics and climate change.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".