MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4379986429 · doi:10.1080/09639489.2023.2170338

Barthes et le cinéma-vérité dans le film « La Lutte »

2023· article· fr· W4379986429 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
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

VenueModern & Contemporary France · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le film « La Lutte » de Michel Brault a été réalisé en 1961 sous l’influence assumée de Roland Barthes et de son article « Le Monde où l’on catche ». Barthes a participé au tournage et il a influencé la conception du film. Souvent évoqué rapidement à propos de Barthes et du cinéma au Québec, ce film est rarement étudié en détails sous l’angle barthésien. Moins connu que « Le Sport et les hommes » réalisé avec les commentaires de Barthes par Hubert Aquin, la même année, « La Lutte » marque pourtant mieux l’influence barthésienne sur le nouveau cinéma vérité. Pour Aquin, Barthes n’avait pu écrire qu’un commentaire, et il s’était vu contraint à un jeu d’équilibriste entre sa volonté de mytho-analyser le sport et la nouvelle opacité de la médiatisation du sport ; pour « La Lutte » l’ensemble du dispositif filmique, contenu et forme sont sous influence barthésienne, et pour comble, il ne contient aucun commentaire. Habité de propositions formelles et de réévaluations idéologiques, « La Lutte » devra rester comme la contribution de Barthes en acte au Cinéma-direct.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.869
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.219 · 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