OBERHUBER, d’Andrea (Québec, 2012). Corps de papier: résonances
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'tude htroclite d'Andrea Oberhuber, o la riche multiplicit des formes textuelles et visuelles se marie une chorale harmonieuse de voix fminines, demande un compte rendu critique son image, c'est--dire, crit plusieurs mains, illustr de collages indits.Sans doute plus que toute autre chose, Corps de papier : rsonances est une oeuvre sur la collaboration, et ce, entre femmes.Dans son travail critique exprimental, Oberhuber est accompagne (quelle belle image musicale soulignant l'esprit de sororit qui se dgage de l'oeuvre) de Catherine Mavrikakis, Nicole Brossard et Verena Stefan, cratrices contemporaines qui ont toutes les trois contribu l'ouvrage.Oberhuber est galement en consonance la fois parfaite et anachronique avec d'autres femmes-artistes, notamment Claire de Duras, Claude Cahun, Leonora Carrington, Unica Zrn et lise Turcotte, les hrones de papier (15) sur lesquelles porte son tude, aussi bien qu'avec A. et Andrina, les avatars qu'elle a invents et qu'elle assume sur le mode fictif.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".