L'abstraction et la métaphore en animation : pour une communication émotionnelle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette recherche tente d'explorer le potentiel artistique de l'animation. Elle vient soutenir et analyser le processus créateur de nos courts métrages d'animation, La cage qui est ma beauté et Trilogie abstraite, en se basant sur diverses références provenant d'autres courts métrages. \n \nLe premier chapitre se penche sur les émotions et leur rôle dans l'art. Nous observons le pouvoir de persuasion des émotions et, à l'inverse, le rôle de la création dans la gestion de ces émotions. \n \nLe deuxième chapitre aborde l'animation comme forme d'art en soulignant son potentiel métaphorique et ses points forts grâce à différents exemples basés sur plusieurs courts métrages d'animation. \n \nLe troisième chapitre analyse des films d'animation abstraits à travers les témoignages de créateurs. \n \nEnfin, dans le quatrième chapitre, nous décrivons le processus créateur dans nos deux courts métrages en animation.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.007 |
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".