MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4394924858 · doi:10.25965/as.1196

Sémantique des affiches

2007· article· fr· W4394924858 on OpenAlexaff
Louis Hébert

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Rimouski
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction Nous proposons une analyse sémantique, tant dans la dimension iconique1 que textuelle, de Festival mondial du film et des beaux-arts (1947)2, oeuvre de René Magritte qui relève du genre de l’affiche d’événement culturel et à ce titre est proche de l’idiolecte artistique du peintre. Notre objectif est double, d’une part, rendre compte de l’organisation sémantique interne de l’œuvre et, d’autre part, montrer en quoi et comment, malgré son statut d’affiche, cette production participe fortement du corpus artistique de Magritte. Nous avons limité au strict minimum la formalisation de l’analyse et donc le vocabulaire technique. Deux idiolectes Posons que deux grands idiolectes informent les productions artistiques de Magritte : celui défini par les productions proprement artistiques et celui, moins étendu, défini par les productions commerciales3. Considérons que ces deux idiolectes se partagent sans reste l’inventaire des productions magrittiennes et qu’ils entretiennent entre eux une relation inverse, de sorte que ce qui est plus commercial est moins proprement artistique et vice-versa. Prenons deux productions commerciales occupant des positions opposées sur l’échelle des productions commerciales : l’affiche Festival mondial… et l’affichette Toffee Antoine. En supprimant le bandeau linguistique de l’affiche, on obtient une œuvre qui ne démériterait pas du corpus artistique. Nous montrerons d’ailleurs plus loin deux tableaux antérieurs d’une année qui se rapprocherai

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)0.004
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.010
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.233 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies→French-language works237,207→