MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1544436846 · doi:10.7202/1026213ar

Les essais de François Paré

2014· article· fr· W1544436846 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Benoît Doyon-Gosselin, Rachel Veilleux

Bibliographic record

VenueVoix et Images · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à MontréalUniversité de Moncton
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article vise à rendre compte des figures exemplaires de la Franco-Amérique présentes dans l’oeuvre de François Paré afin de témoigner de l’évolution de la pensée de l’essayiste. Il s’agira de traiter, dans un premier temps, des plus importantes que l’on retrouve dans son premier essai, Les littérature de l’exiguïté, et, dans un deuxième temps, de celles présentes dans son dernier essai sur le sujet, Le fantasme d’Escanaba, qui prolonge et cherche à dépasser les visées du premier. Conscient des limites de sa notion fondamentale, Paré restreint son corpus dans Le fantasme d’Escanaba pour mettre en lumière les auteurs phares de la Franco-Amérique en laissant de côté les littératures de l’exiguïté de par le monde. Par ailleurs, un des enjeux poétiques du parcours essayistique de Paré devient dans le dernier essai le glissement vers un « je » nostalgique dont le parcours individuel reste intimement lié à son objet d’études. En analysant le panthéon des auteurs marquants pour François Paré, on tentera de mieux circonscrire les convergences, les contradictions et les « dérives obsessionnelles » qui habitent l’essayiste.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

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 studies0.0130.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVoix et ImagesSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207