MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4300747051 · doi:10.7202/1090758ar

Imaginer le devenir des écrans : l’interface cérébrale de Black Mirror

2022· article· fr· W4300747051 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueCygne noir · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse multidisciplinary academic research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En plus de constituer des objets usuels de notre quotidien, les écrans sont investis d’un imaginaire fantasmatique. C’est en parallèle de leurs développements techniques, notamment de leurs métamorphoses physiques, que la science-fiction imagine le devenir des écrans. Cet article se propose d’analyser l’une des figures marquantes de cet imaginaire, à savoir l’interface cérébrale. L’épisode « The Entire History of You » de la série télévisée d’anthologie Black Mirror (2011) servira de point de départ à la réflexion. Il s’agira en premier lieu de comprendre le fonctionnement du dispositif fictionnel afin de saisir les conséquences d’une telle technologie sur la faculté mémorielle et sur les personnages. Il sera ensuite question d’analyser l’ « intermédialité fictionnelle » à l’oeuvre dans la figure d’interface cérébrale pour enfin explorer la portée heuristique de l’épisode de science-fiction.

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.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.368
Teacher spread0.308 · 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