La page féminine des grands quotidiens montréalais comme lieu de sociabilité littéraire au tournant du xxe siècle 1
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur propose d’interroger des sociabilités imaginées propres aux femmes de lettres canadiennes-françaises telles qu’elles se donnent à lire dans les journaux et les périodiques du tournant du xxe siècle. Plus spécifiquement, l’étude porte sur la communauté littéraire imaginaire que construisent les femmes de lettres en analysant la liste des auteurs les plus souvent recommandés par Joséphine Marchand, Françoise (pseud. de Robertine Barry), Gaétane de Montreuil (pseud. de Georgina Bélanger) et Madeleine (pseud. d’Anne-Marie Gleason) dans les différents périodiques et journaux dans lesquels elles signent leurs chroniques. Ce palmarès offre une perspective inédite sur la culture commune de l’époque. Outre qu’il permet de constater d’importantes distorsions entre les auteurs-vedettes et notre perception des auteurs qui comptent pour l’époque, des résultats préliminaires permettent de poser l’hypothèse que sous l’apparent conformisme moral et social des suggestions de lecture, les femmes de lettres construisent une communauté littéraire au féminin susceptible de faire admettre certaines pratiques littéraires des femmes sans heurter de plein fouet l’idéologie dominante.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.032 | 0.002 |
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".