Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article porte sur l’évolution des représentations sur les chamans qui sont contenues dans les films, majoritairement documentaires et francophones, depuis les années 1990. Les « films à chamans » des années 1980-1990 les représentant majoritairement isolés dans leur milieu naturel et en tant que figure muette et archaïque tendent à être remplacés par des productions audiovisuelles qui, à partir des années 2000, sont de plus en plus nombreuses à documenter leur inscription dans la mondialisation. L’article, qui s’appuie sur un corpus de quarante films, focalise sur ceux révélant des chamans de tous les continents qui voyagent, entreprennent, utilisent les nouvelles technologies, accueillent des touristes et participent à des alliances et à des festivals. L’analyse montre que ces films, en rompant avec la figure du sage bienveillant intemporel et sédentaire qui oeuvre de manière désintéressée au bien de l’humanité, participent à moderniser l’image des chamans et, ainsi, à leur revanche.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".