MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394003280 · doi:10.7202/1100684ar

De la critique théorique à la critique de la société : penser le concept de réification chez Gilles Deleuze et Félix Guattari

2023· article· fr· W4394003280 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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
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

VenueCygne noir · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophy, Sociology, Political Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, j’examine les points de rencontre possibles entre l’oeuvre de Deleuze et Guattari et la théorie critique de l’École de Francfort afin d’établir leur complémentarité. L’hypothèse que je défends est que c’est à partir d’un concept phare de la théorie critique, la réification, qu’il est possible d’opérer un rapprochement productif entre les penseurs de l’École de Francfort et Deleuze et Guattari. Dans la première partie, le concept de réification et le rôle que celui-ci a joué dans la pensée critique allemande sont présentés (Marx, Lukács, Adorno). Cet exercice doit permettre de mesurer la pertinence du concept de réification pour établir une double critique : critique théorique et critique de la société. Dans la seconde partie, je montre comment cette double critique traverse la pensée deleuzo-guattarienne.

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)0.009
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.686
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0090.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.380 · 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