MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4384785267 · doi:10.7202/1101525ar

Subjectivité et engagement dans Scènes de lutte de classe au Portugal de Robert Kramer et Philip J. Spinelli

2023· article· fr· W4384785267 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Benjamin Léon

Bibliographic record

VenueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C’est au milieu des années 1970 que les cinéastes américains Robert Kramer et Philip J. Spinelli quittent une Amérique en transition – celle de l’après-Vietnam – pour un territoire non moins en transition : le Portugal de l’après-révolution des Oeillets. Ne cherchant pas à inscrire l’événement historique sur les semaines qui suivirent avril 1974 et qui menèrent à la chute de l’Estado Novo (Deuxième République), les réalisateurs se concentrent sur un temps plus long, soit jusqu’en 1976. Ainsi, ils interrogent de façon linéaire la tension fulgurante et chaotique de la Révolution, tout autant que les potentialités politiques réelles du mouvement pour le pouvoir populaire. À travers un travail de montage fragmentaire des événements, Kramer et Spinelli établissent, dans Scènes de lutte de classe au Portugal (1977), un contrepoint analytique distancié mais non moins ambigu d’une écriture de l’histoire in situ. Sans minorer la place de Spinelli en tant que coréalisateur, nous chercherons à recentrer notre propos sur la subjectivité assumée de Kramer dans l’énonciation des faits – la chronique d’une révolution –, laquelle est indissociable de son engagement politique – le positionnement marxiste.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.089

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.013
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.225 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCinémas Revue d études cinématographiquesSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207