Paul Dirkx. <em>Les « Amis belges » : presse littéraire et franco-universalisme</em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
David VRYDAGHS Amitiés et aménités : des rapports de force littéraires franco-belgesLe silence des littérateurs français envers les littératures francophones -en l'occurrence la belge -est bien connu.Et quand discours il y a, les écrivains et journalistes de l'Hexagone cachent mal leur ignorance du sujet.Qu'on songe simplement à Baudelaire ou au propos de Mauriac reproduit en exergue de la première partie du dernier livre de Paul Dirkx, Les « Amis belges » : « Quelle horreur d'être belge […].Il n'y aurait de pire que d'être suisse.» Chose curieuse, mais elle aussi régulièrement entendue : ces rapports où règne le désintérêt pas toujours poli sont le plus souvent vécus sur le mode de l'amitié, intense ou éprouvée, par les acteurs des deux bords comme, le plus souvent, par les chercheurs universitaires (ces derniers se contentant généralement de révéler des rapports personnels d'amitié -comme ceux d'Hugo avec les milieux littéraires bruxellois lors de son exilou, plus simplement encore, intertextuels).
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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; 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".