MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7008630700

Comment prendre une ville d'assaut, suivi de l'insuffisance subjective : Exercice et impasse du point de vue dans "Yes Sir! madame"-- et "Being John Malkovich

2006· other· fr· W7008630700 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke) · 2006
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPerspective (graphical)Context (archaeology)Identity (music)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce mémoire en études françaises est avant tout axé sur la création. Il se présente en deux temps avec un scénario de film, d'une part, et une réflexion critique, d'autre part. La première partie du mémoire consiste en un scénario de moyen métrage. L'action s'y déroule comme suit: un groupe de journalistes et d'invités participent à un journal télévisé faisant état d'une occupation armée des rues de Montréal. L'opération visant à préparer les troupes à d'éventuels conflits est traitée de manière conventionnelle, à cela près qu'on accole la mention"spécial" au bulletin de nouvelles. En contrepoint, des réclames publicitaires défilent à l'écran, réclames commentées, voire contestées, par un choeur inspiré des tragédies grecques. La seconde partie, quant à elle, se concentre sur l'étude du plan subjectif en tant que manifestation d'un processus de médiation dans une perspective postmoderne. Sont analysées les questions du point de vue et du plan subjectif dans deux films des années 1990: Yes Sir! madame... de Robert Morin et Being John Malkovich de Spike Jonze. Enfin, un retour sur le travail de création jette un pont entre les deux sections de ce mémoire.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.173
Threshold uncertainty score0.344

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0170.021
Scholarly communication0.0110.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0030.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.211
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 designTheoretical 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge UdeS (Institutional Deposit of the University of Sherbrooke)→French-language works237,207→