MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7004355360

Borderline Cinema

2018· dissertation· en· W7004355360 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueQSpace (Queen's University Library) · 2018
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicPhytochemistry and Bioactive Compounds
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQueen's University
KeywordsGloomCircumstantial evidenceFusible alloyTubulopathyParaphernaliaSubject (documents)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The term ‘Borderline Cinema’ may sound strange at first, even for scholars and film aficionados. It may also sound like something unprecedented, modern, a result of the changes and re-adaptations in the film industry that happen through the advances of digital media and new advertising markets. The term connotes a range of possibilities, from national borders to lines between cinema and other forms. In recent years, driven by the industrialization process and the rapid changes in digital technology happening around the world, new formats of film productions have emerged. One of these new production formats is Borderline Cinema. This type of cinema has existed for years specifically in the Brazilian suburbs, yet it remains largely unknown and marginalized. The process of creating a Borderline production involves more than technical knowledge, but also a social, political and economic conjuncture which is intrinsically linked to the history of Brazilian cinematography. Despite being marginalized by the mainstream film market, Borderline filmmakers are not entirely excluded from having access to cameras, media, and technology. This creates a form of social engagement with global and local cultures. Nestor García Canclini (1995) and Stuart Hall (2000) define this relation as a form of cultural hybridity that is capable of forming new spatial and social relationships, as well as creating new types of production models. With the implementation of the incentive law mechanisms in the 1990s, Brazil boosted its film production in the country and created new formats for the sponsoring of cultural activities. Once invisible, Borderline Cinema started to gain attention from the market, which was interested in promoting festivals and debates around these films. These changes raised questions, such as what are the incentives behind the promotion of Borderline Cinema festivals? Is the scenario for this type of film finally being legitimatized in Brazil? After the establishment of incentive laws mechanisms for the cultural sector in Brazil, the country was involved in a conjuncture where the cultural production is directly associated with marketing strategies and commercial appeal, placing Borderline Cinema in a critical position that needs to be analyzed and studied.

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.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.577
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.208
Teacher spread0.201 · 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