MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407174281 · doi:10.7202/1115950ar

Numérimorphose et mutations de la télévision et des écrans dans <i>Mukbang</i> de Fanie Demeule

2024· article· fr· W4407174281 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Caroline Loranger

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Mukbang de Fanie Demeule aborde l’influence des écrans dans la société moderne à travers le mukbang, pratique lors de laquelle des internautes regardent des vidéos de personnes mangeant de grandes quantités de nourriture en direct sur YouTube. Le roman rapporte le destin de Kim Delorme, une jeune influenceuse qui perd la vie en essayant de consommer 20 000 calories lors d’un de ces mukbangs. Dans cette oeuvre, Demeule utilise plus de 200 codes QR pour enrichir le récit avec des contenus numériques, soulignant ainsi les thèmes de la cyberdépendance, des troubles alimentaires et de l’isolement social malgré une hyperconnexion. L’article analyse la représentation négative de la société de l’écran dans Mukbang, en utilisant le concept de « numérimorphose » pour décrire la transformation de la télévision en média numérique, exacerbant ses aspects les plus sombres sur Internet. L’autrice explore comment cette mutation est thématisée dans le roman et comment les codes QR intégrés dans le texte permettent aux lecteurs de ressentir directement les effets des écrans. Cette approche enrichit l’expérience de lecture, transformant le roman en un « livre-écran » qui réfléchit sur l’influence et les possibles dangers des nouveaux médias.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.350
Teacher spread0.324 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207