MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1509089933 · doi:10.7202/1028973ar

Pour un imaginaire grand parisien

2015· article· fr· W1509089933 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Régine Robin

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes littéraires · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFrench Urban and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La place de Paris dans l’imaginaire collectif hexagonal et international est énorme. L’étude décrit la naissance et l’évolution de la représentation enchantée de la capitale française, capitale du romantisme à laquelle la littérature, le cinéma, la chanson, l’art en général ont donné une aura qui s’est étendue sur le long XXe siècle et jusqu’à nos jours. Mais dans les temps récents, le dynamisme de cette célébration symbolique s’est atténué, comme s’il y avait eu un trop-plein de chromos et une usure progressive des signes. Cette érosion et cette surabondance ont engendré des clichés et des stéréotypes indéfiniment reconduits et ressassés. Après avoir dressé ce constat et montré comment se construit ce Paris « carte postale » dont Midnight in Paris de Woody Allen fournit un exemple, l’étude propose d’aller vers la ville réelle d’aujourd’hui et de reconnaître en elle un projet potentiel qui n’attend que des écrivains, des cinéastes, des penseurs pour avoir des assises imaginaires solides. Abolissant le périphérique, liant le centre historique aux banlieues, ce projet vise à donner naissance à cette grande métropole multiculturelle de 10 millions d’habitants qui porte déjà un nom, celui de « Grand Paris ».

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.012
Scholarly communication0.0090.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.006

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 head0.049
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes littérairesSame topicFrench Urban and Social StudiesFrench-language works237,207