Les plateformes numériques consacrées aux archives des arts vivants : geste mémoriel ou outil de légitimation ? Le cas de Somim
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article propose une étude du cas Somim, plateforme numérique consacrée au Festival Mimos (Périgueux, France). Ce point d’ancrage invite à une réflexion plus globale sur les enjeux de mémoire, de médiation et de légitimation culturelles inhérents à ces objets virtuels. Inscrites dans les politiques publiques françaises de numérisation depuis les années 1990, les plateformes numériques vouées aux arts vivants mettent en tension des questions de conservation, d’usage et de médiation des archives audiovisuelles. En observant le cas de Somim et en jetant un regard sur cinq plateformes similaires, l’article montre que ces dispositifs numériques participent à la construction d’une mémoire collective tout en révélant les fragilités économiques, techniques et symboliques des processus contemporains de patrimonialisation des arts du mime français en particulier, et du spectacle vivant en général.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".