Enquêtes humanimales : vers une reconfiguration des matériaux dont demain sera fait
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette contribution s’intéresse à trois conférences-performances issues de la restitution du cycle Imaginaires des futurs possibles (2021) à Lausanne (Université de Lausanne; Théâtre Vidy-Lausanne) qui traitent des relations entre êtres humains et animaux. Vis-à-vis de la question emblématique des ruptures avec ladite nature pendant l’anthropocène, les performances adoptent la méthode de l’enquête préconisée par Vinciane Despret. Elles présentent leurs recherches sur l’histoire des relations à certains animaux (hippocampes, pingouins, vaches, chiens) sans mettre ceux-ci en scène. Ce parti pris permet de comprendre les généalogies et incohérences de nos rapports humanimaux et de mettre en évidence leurs enjeux sensibles et éthiques. Les enquêtes complexes et inachevables interpellent les spectateur·trices, appelé·es à se poser à leur tour la question des relations qu’il·elles pourraient ou voudraient développer.
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 | 0.009 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".