Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There is a dominating power in every society; a power which imposes its own ideology on the people. Termed as ‘discourse’ by Foucault, this postmodern ideology is what people have to follow to gain their identity. Consequently, people need to stay in line with the dominating power, so that they would achieve their personal goals, identity and become a part of the pyramid of power. This power is only subdued and controlled by a superior power, which can cause changes in the dominating ideology, termed ‘Archive’ by Foucault. It seems that the ideas of Foucault can transparently be applied to the poem Mont Blanc by the English Romantic poet Shelley. This article aims at foregrounding Foucault’s idea of power in Shelley’s Mont Blanc , which does not seem to have received a significant attention by the researchers. Key words: Power; Foucault; Shelley; Discourse; Archive Résumé Il y a un pouvoir dominant dans toute société, un pouvoir qui impose sa propre idéologie sur le peuple. Nommé comme «discours » de Foucault, cette idéologie postmoderne est ce que les gens ont à suivre pour obtenir leur identité. Par conséquent, les gens ont besoin de rester en ligne avec le pouvoir dominant, afin qu'ils atteignent leurs objectifs personnels, l'identité et devenir une partie de la pyramide du pouvoir. Ce pouvoir est seulement maîtrisé et contrôlé par une puissance supérieure, qui peut causer des changements dans l'idéologie dominante, appelée «Archives » par Foucault. Il semble que les idées de Foucault peut être appliqué de manière transparente pour le poème du Mont-Blanc par les Anglais Shelley poète romantique. Cet article vise à mettant en avant l'idée de Foucault du pouvoir dans Shelley du Mont-Blanc, qui ne semble pas avoir reçu une attention significative par les chercheurs. Mots clés: Energie; Foucault; Shelley; Discours; Archives
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 | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".