Téléphone, phonographe et radio : l'imaginaire sonore entre textualité et reproduction technique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce mémoire décrit l’imaginaire sonore tel qu’il s’est transformé par l’apparition de\ndispositifs de reproduction (téléphone, phonographe et radio) à la fin du 19ème siècle et au début du 20ème siècle. Si ces appareils de reproduction sonore signalent un nouveau contexte socioculturel permettant la captation, la conservation et la transmission de manifestations sensibles, ils transforment également la manière de concevoir le son, ils modifient le statut de l’audition par rapport aux autres sens et reconfigurent un imaginaire qui traduit un rapport à soi, à autrui et au monde. Cette étude littéraire de la reproductibilité sonore propose une réflexion entre technologie et poétique en questionnant l’idée de communication. L’élément spécifique qui caractérise les appareils de reproduction sonore est un objet technique nommé «transducteur ». Je considère le transducteur à la fois comme métaphore et matérialité de médiation; conçu en termes de dispositif de transduction, ce concept permet une différente compréhension des pratiques sociales et de l’imaginaire constituant cet artefact culturel.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.004 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".