MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7005564558

Représentations filmiques de lesbiennes/queers issues de la diaspora indienne en Occident

2014· other· fr· W7005564558 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2014
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiasporaNarrativeRace (biology)Nationality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Devant l’explosion des représentations filmiques des pratiques et identités sexuelles non normatives qui caractérise actuellement la sphère cinématographique, la présente étude, dotée d’outils théoriques et méthodologiques issus de la sociologie du cinéma, des cultural studies et de l’approche féministe intersectionnelle, investit analytiquement trois longs métrages de fiction de narration conventionnelle dont des lesbiennes/ queers d’origine indienne en Occident, aux positionnements partiellement minoritaires sur les axes de division sociale que sont le sexe, la race et l’ethnicité, et la sexualité, occupent le devant et le derrière de la caméra : Chutney Popcorn (Nisha Ganatra, 1999), Nina’s Heavenly Delights (Pratibha Parmar, 2007), et I Can’t Think Straight (Shamim Sarif, 2008). Bref, l’objectif principal de ce mémoire est d’exposer les conceptualisations des expériences et subjectivités queers privilégiées par ce régime particulier de représentations, puis d’évaluer dans quelles mesures et de quelles manières il reproduit et déstabilise celles de discours académiques, activistes et nationaux postcoloniaux qui circulent internationalement.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.002
GPT teacher head0.170
Teacher spread0.168 · 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

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada)→French-language works237,207→