MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4323029263 · doi:10.4000/rsh.422

Une Intelligence artificielle trop efficace

2021· article· fr· W4323029263 on OpenAlexaff
A.C. Plata Bello, Mara Magda Maftei

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des Sciences Humaines · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsArtificial Intelligence in Medicine (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mara Magda Maftei : Vous avez publi en 2016 chez Gallimard un roman sur une intelligence artificielle, Ada, un programme informatique, un ordinateur conu pour imiter le fonctionnement humain dans le but d'crire des romans l'eau de rose. Comme dans beaucoup de romans posthumanistes, l'intelligence artificielle se rvolte et veut conqurir sa libert. Cette soif de libert est-elle cense reproduire le comportement humain ou avez-vous eu en tte des exemples classiques comme le film de Stanley Kubrick, 2001 : L'Odysse de l'espace (1968) ?

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.591
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.482
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.117 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des Sciences HumainesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207