MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312372052 · doi:10.4000/1895.8666

Le Sud-Ouest, trois hommes et des grottes pour la première adaptation française de Nanook of the North devenu Nanouk l’Esquimau, l’homme des temps primitifs (1922)

2021· article· fr· W4312372052 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Claudette Peyrusse

Bibliographic record

Venue1895 · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Nanouk l’Esquimau, première version française du film de Robert Flaherty, fut un succès. La Compagnie française du film, éditrice qui crée l’adaptation à la place de Pathé, est constituée de Georges Lourau, un jeune Palois et le Toulousain Joseph Mandement. Mandement est dans le cinéma depuis 1916 après des années de théâtre en France et au Canada. Il s’est adapté à des publics variés. Dominé par la production américaine, le cinéma français importe massivement, francise et modifie. La copie nitrate de la Cinémathèque de Toulouse révèle que l’adaptateur s’il touche peu au montage crée des intertitres sans traduire les originaux. C’est l’usage, comme la narration familière de l’Éternel silence, autre version française de 1922. Mais la promotion de Nanouk laisse croire que les opérateurs sont français. Pratique plus rare, une séquence est ajoutée, provenant d’une bande de Mandement sur la préhistoire, qui rapproche la vie esquimaude de l’âge du renne. Cette version française, qui séduisit ses spectateurs du savant à l’enfant, est à restaurer et invite à découvrir d’autres adaptateurs.

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)0.001
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 score0.034
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue1895Same topicCultural Identity and HeritageFrench-language works237,207