Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le collectif Comparative Literature in an Age of Globalization, publication quelque peu tardive aux Presses de l'Universite Johns Hopkins du rapport commande a Haun Saussy de l'universite Yale par l’American Comparative Literature Association (ACLA) a propos de l'etat present de la discipline aux Etats-Unis (2003), peut etre considere dans une large mesure comme une reponse au Bernheimer Report de 1993, mais dans un sens qui deplace l'enjeu de l'enquete du contexte multiculturaliste vers celui de la mondialisation. Haun Saussy a concu l'ouvrage en deux parties, la premiere constituee de douze contributions offrant des points de vue tres diversifies et souvent contradictoires entre-eux, la seconde faite de sept reactions qui compliquent encore la nature d'un debat dont le caractere polemique est non seulement souhaite, mais encore recherche. Les principales questions soulevees par le Bernheimer Report retrouvent droit de cite dans celui de Saussy: celle du litteraire et de la specificite de son objet; celle de l'etude des textes en traduction ou en version originale; la critique de l'eurocentrisme et, dans une moindre mesure, la question de la place de la theorie en comparee. Si le spectre des Cultural Studies etait dans le Bernheimer Report la principale source d'inquietude, c'est desormais celui de la mondiale (World Literature) qui donne le frisson a nos collegues americains. Dans la genealogie mythique du comparatisme litteraire qu'il retrace brievement dans son article introductif au titre etrangement surrealiste (Exquisite Cadavers Stitched from Fresh Nightmares) Haun Saussy fait une place a Goethe, a Mme de Stael et a l'obscur Hugo Meltzl de Lomnitz, mais curieusement fait silence sur Abel-Francois Villemain qui fut non seulement le premier a employer en 1829 dans son cours de francaise fait en Sorbonne l'expression litterature com-
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 | 0.016 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.041 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.032 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".