MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1550359852 · doi:10.1093/fs/knt185

Le Compère Mathieu; ou, Les Bigarrures de l'esprit humain H <scp>enri-</scp> J <scp>oseph</scp> D <scp>ulaurens</scp> : <i>Le Compère Mathieu; ou, Les Bigarrures de l'esprit humain</i> . Édition critique établie par D <scp>idier</scp> G <scp>ambert</scp> . (L'Âge des Lumières, 67). Paris: Honoré Champion, 2012. 954 pp.

2013· article· fr· W1550359852 on OpenAlexaff
Édouard Langille

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Studies · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsSt. Francis Xavier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTributeImitationArtArt historyHumanitiesPhilosophyClassicsLiteraturePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We can thank Robert Darnton for the attention given nowadays to France's Grub Street, the clandestine writers of the eighteenth-century whom puritanical critics kept out of sight. In recent years we have witnessed the rediscovery of eccentric figures such as Fougeret de Monbron (1706–1760), and, with increasing regularity, the defrocked Jesuit Henri-Joseph Dulaurens (1719–1793): my own edition of Dulaurens's Candide, second partie appeared in 2003 (University of Exeter Press), and Stéphan Pascau has since published two hefty volumes devoted to his life and works. Didier Gambert's imposing and expensively produced critical edition of Dulaurens's best-known novel Le Compère Mathieu (1766) is a worthy tribute to a writer unmentioned in standard anthologies of eighteenth-century literature. In his Introduction, Gambert tells us that Diderot thought highly of Le Compère Mathieu and that he compared Dulaurens favourably with Rabelais. Voltaire, on the other hand, considered it a poor imitation of his own Candide...

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

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 studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0430.009

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.242 · 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrench StudiesSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207