MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1555827237 · doi:10.7202/018622ar

André Beucler, de Gontcharov à Dostoïevski

2008· article· fr· W1555827237 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bruno Curatolo

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Né à Saint-Pétersbourg d’un père français et d’une mère russe, André Beucler, dès son entrée dans la vie littéraire parisienne, au début des années vingt, a participé à la promotion de la littérature et de la culture slaves en France. Proche des écrivains les plus représentatifs de cette identité franco-russe, Joseph Kessel ou Emmanuel Bove, c’est presque « naturellement » que l’influence des romanciers russes s’est exercée sur son imaginaire mais de façon très consciente aussi puisque Beucler a analysé les oeuvres de ses prédécesseurs comme dans cet essai inédit, « Dostoïevski et l’homme idéal », où se dessinent les tendances de sa propre poétique. La réception critique du Mauvais sort montre ainsi que le récit a bien été lu dans l’éclairage des figures phares, Oblomov et L’idiot, tant sur le plan du caractère des personnages que sur celui de leur philosophie existentielle. Toutefois, Philippe Bohême, l’« anti-héros » de Beucler, s’il se rattache à un type déjà connu, n’en annonce pas moins les réussites les plus spectaculaires dans ce registre complexe, le Roquentin de Sartre ou le Meursault de Camus, emblèmes d’un nouveau « mal du siècle », entre aboulie et pulsion meurtrière.

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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

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 studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.005

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207