Sous la couverture : le livre à l’index, objet de censure. Analyse et typologie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The history of the written word has for a long time in Quebec been governed by an ecclesiastical censorship that, with unequivocal authority, determined which were the “bad books” and which were permitted to be read. Censorship thus became a means to controlling and domesticating the power that all books possess. The library, as a site for the exchange of understanding, frequented as such for generations, is a symbolic place which bears its own antithesis when it contains a section of forbidden books. In considering the material culture dimension of the book, bearing traces of this exclusion, it becomes possible to reconstruct the book’s original trajectory. By paying attention to the clues left behind in the form of various marginalia and notations, the book as object testifies to a different account of the practice of censorship. Resume Au Quebec, l’histoire de la lecture a longtemps ete regie par la censure ecclesiastique qui determinait avec une autorite sans appel les « mauvais livres » et ceux qu’il etait permis de lire. La censure devint alors le moyen de controler et de domestiquer la puissance que tout livre possede. Lieu de partage des savoirs, frequentee depuis des generations, la bibliotheque est un lieu symbolique portant sa propre antithese lorsqu’elle contient une section de livres interdits. En considerant la dimension de culture materielle du livre, porteur des traces de cette exclusion, il devient possible de reconstituer la trajectoire inedite de cet objet. En s’attardant aux indices laisses par les differentes formes que prennent les marques de sa marginalisation, le livre a l’index est un temoin des pratiques de la censure.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 teacher head, 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".