MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6992541486

L'oeuvre d'art fictive dans le roman contemporain : immersion, intermédialité et interaction.

2013· other· fr· W6992541486 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2013
Typeother
Languagefr
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeuroscience and Neural Engineering
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFace (sociological concept)Meaning (existential)The Imaginary
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire s’intéresse à la présence des œuvres d’art fictives dans le roman contemporain. Leur description précise remet en question les codes de la représentation et soumet le lecteur à une autre forme d’expérience face à l’œuvre d’art. C’est à travers les concepts d’immersion, d’intermédialité et d’interaction que la fiction de l’œuvre d’art dans le texte sera ici abordée à travers trois différents romans, soit The Body Artist de Don DeLillo, La Carte et le territoire de Michel Houellebecq et Œuvres d’Édouard Levé. La transformation de l’expérience de lecture suggère un renouvellement de l’esthétique littéraire, accentuant l’importance de la participation du lecteur dans la démarche créatrice, et ouvrant les possibilités de la transmission de l’art contemporain. Les dispositifs propres au récit sont mis de l’avant pour intégrer le médium visuel, et ainsi questionner le rapport à l’attribution du sens de l’œuvre d’art, à son interprétation et à sa perception. Le présent mémoire tentera de proposer des possibilités pour l’art contemporain de se manifester à l’extérieur des institutions muséales traditionnelles, permettant ainsi de considérer l’immersion littéraire comme étant non seulement une expérience de lecture, mais aussi une approche face à l’art visuel.

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

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmano category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptno category
Domain: not available · Genre: Other
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Theoretical or conceptuallow
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.779
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.006
GPT teacher head0.164
Teacher spread0.159 · 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

Labeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.

The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.

Study designNot applicable · Theoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)Same topicNeuroscience and Neural EngineeringFrench-language works237,207