MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4304185051 · doi:10.5117/9789462980730_ch01

Mind(ing) the Gap

2022· book-chapter· en· W4304185051 on OpenAlexaff
Martin Lefebvre

Bibliographic record

VenueAmsterdam University Press eBooks · 2022
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicVisual Culture and Art Theory
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconicityIndexicalityFilmmakingArgument (complex analysis)Movie theaterRepresentation (politics)EpistemologyRealismPerspective (graphical)Space (punctuation)AestheticsLinguisticsSociologyArtPhilosophyVisual artsPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author’s purpose in this chapter is twofold: first to define special effects, and second to exploit this definition to reconsider how Charles S. Peirce’s conceptions of iconicity and especially indexicality can help us logically account for some of the issues that pertain to representation in the cinema. The author wishes to show how Peirce’s concepts not only remain viable for thinking about cinema but also offer a powerful tool for critically analyzing images. The argument is weaved around the notion of ‘gap,’ of which various instances are taken into consideration — whether the space between film frames or the gap between ‘film world’ and real world, that between fiction and fact, or between filmmaking and film viewing, as well as that which distinguishes iconicity and indexicality.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.962
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.061
GPT teacher head0.213
Teacher spread0.152 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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 venueAmsterdam University Press eBooksSame topicVisual Culture and Art TheoryFrench-language works237,207