Bibliographic record
Abstract
Este texto foi apresentado em novembro de 2000 em Niterói (RJ) em um Colóquio intitulado “Americanidade compartilhada”, organizado pela UFF (Universidade Federal Fluminense) e pela AIÉQ (Association Internationale d’ Études Québécoises). Como ficcionista, Pierre Samson apresenta um ensaio argumentativo original e instigante revelando seu grande interesse pelas coisas do Brasil. Neste texto, ele fala de um lugar de enunciação que é o Quebec, mais especificamente Montreal, para apresentar uma reflexão sobre a americanidade, tentando valer-se de elementos da antropofagia cultural brasileira. Lamenta que as tentativas de compartilhar a América tenham sido tão tardias e imperfeitas, uma vez que as elites quebequenses estiveram, em grande parte, mais interessadas nos modelos culturais europeus do que nos latino-americanos, mas conclui almejando que as culturas das Américas possam ser melhor compartilhadas.Résumé: Ce texte a été présenté en novembre 2000 à Niterói (RJ) dans le cadre d’un Colloque organisé par l’UFF (Univ. Fédérale Fluminense) et par l’AIÉQ (Ass. Internationale d’Études Québécoises) sous le titre de « Américanité partagée ». Étant romancier, Pierre Samson présente un essai argumentatif original où on aperçoit son grand intérêt pour la culture brésilienne. Son lieu d’énonciation est le Québec, plus particulièrement la ville de Montréal, mais sa réflexion sur la notion d’américanité se fonde sur des éléments de l’Anthropophagie culturelle brésilienne. II regrette que les tentatives de partage de l’Amérique furent tardives et imparfaites, surtout à cause des élites québécoises qui ont regardé plutôt vers l’Europe que vers le Sud de l’hémisphère. En conclusion, le souhait que l’idée d’une Américanité partagée puisse se développer.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.082 | 0.031 |
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".