Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les jeux vidéo permettent aux créateurs de laisser le public interagir avec leurs œuvres de manières très variées. Néanmoins, aussi nombreuses que soient les possibilités de choix données au joueur, elles demeurent nécessairement limitées. Doki Doki Literature Club! propose avec audace de détruire cette illusion de liberté, en rendant très visibles les limites de choix qu’il offre. Ce jeu va même au-delà et essaie de faire comprendre au joueur que, outre le jeu, dans le monde réel lui-même, il ne peut pas faire grand-chose, augmentant son malaise au fur et à mesure que progresse l’histoire. Analysant ce terrifiant procédé à la lumière des théories camusiennes sur l’absurde, cet article s’applique à montrer comment Doki Doki Literature Club! tire de ce qui n’est jamais a priori qu’une faiblesse de toute production vidéoludique une force, obligeant le public à une expérience qu’il n’est pas prêt d’oublier.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.032 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".