MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7039171032

La ritournelle et le galop dans la musique romantique et le cinéma moderne

2010· other· fr· W7039171032 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary and Archives Canada (Government of Canada) · 2010
Typeother
Languagefr
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanticismPhonographClassicism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

À partir de l’étude des concepts de la ritournelle et du galop chez Gilles Deleuze et Félix Guattari, le présent mémoire explore les fonctions temporelles de la musique dans le cinéma moderne.\n\nCe concept de temporalité sera déplié en trois temps. En premier lieu, une relecture de la musique romantique permettra d’en développer les différentes articulations temporelles. Par la figure du compositeur incompris, reclus et exilé ainsi que par l’utilisation du fragment, la musique romantique se donne des personnages qui habitent la terre et fondent des territoires. Ensuite, parce qu’il s’agit de comprendre les mécanismes de la musique au cinéma, il est primordial d’examiner les conclusions des différentes théories sur le sujet. De ce parcours théorique, il faudra comprendre que les fonctions classiques attribuées à la musique de cinéma ne réussissent pas complètement à expliquer les mécanismes de la musique dans le cinéma moderne. En fait, c’est qu’une nouvelle problématique motive les images. Ces films, tout comme la musique romantique, font voir les mouvements du temps. Finalement, c’est par la ritournelle et le galop, aux croisements des concepts de la musique romantique et du cinéma moderne, qu’une musicalité filmique fait voir un nouveau temps dans l’image.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.003
GPT teacher head0.152
Teacher spread0.149 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

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