Une écriture du regard instrumenté pour attester des sans-voix : analyse intermédiale de <i>Fantômes dans la rue</i> de J.M.G. Le Clézio
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fantômes dans la rue (2000) de J.M.G. Le Clézio réinterprète le mythe du fantôme dans la machine. L’analyse intermédiale de la nouvelle littéraire est l’occasion d’un questionnement critique sur la vidéosurveillance en milieu urbain et sur la circulation des images produites par les caméras installées dans nos villes. Ces images sont ici considérées comme des biens symboliques d’un genre particulier, qui participent de la formation d’un regard instrumenté et qui contribuent à un imaginaire de la surveillance. Les caractéristiques éditoriales et énonciatives de l’oeuvre leclézienne sont interrogées au prisme d’une éthique du témoignage. Une telle éthique, en effet, donne son sens au texte et à l’intervention de l’écrivain, qui cherche à travers ceux-ci à conscientiser les nantis sur la réalité des subalternes.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".