MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1546803111 · doi:10.18192/analyses.v2i1.481

Francis Gingras (dir.). <em>Une étrange constance. Les motifs merveilleux dans les littératures d’expression française du Moyen Âge à nos jours</em>

2007· article· fr· W1546803111 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Christine McWebb

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoise · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Regards sur la merveille L'ouvrage collectif édité par Francis Gingras, professeur agrégé au Département de littératures de langue française de l'Université de Montréal, est une collection d'articles portant sur les motifs du merveilleux ou, plus précisément, de la merveille dans la littérature du Moyen Âge jusqu'à nos jours.Il s'agit des actes d'un colloque qui, tenu à l'Université de Western Ontario en octobre 2002, se proposait de mettre en présence différentes approches du merveilleux à travers la trame de genres littéraires comme le théâtre, les contes, les romans ainsi qu'à travers les siècles et les littératures de toute la francophonie.La gamme des articles est donc assez large et variée, ce qui, d'une part, apporte de la richesse au recueil, mais d'autre part, provoque un certain manque de cohérence interne, le seul lien étant la thématique du merveilleux qui se tisse à travers les contributions.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.933
Threshold uncertainty score0.283

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 studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0850.063

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.241
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoiseSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207