MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1847122737 · doi:10.18192/analyses.v1i2.459

La comédie, grinçante, de l’amour chez Hélène Monette : Prince Charmant contre Princesse Plastique

2006· article· fr· W1847122737 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lucie Joubert

Bibliographic record

VenueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoise · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesPortraitHappinessComedyPhilosophyArt historyLiteraturePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans Crimes et chatouillements, Hélène Monette propose une lecture ironique des aléas de la vie de couple. Comédie de l’amour qui tient souvent beaucoup plus de la tragédie imminente, l’ouvrage met en lumière un procès de la vie à deux qu’il importe d’analyser sous l’angle du féminin : dans cette course au bonheur, où il n’y a pourtant que des perdants, il semble en effet que la femme soit toujours un peu plus blessée que son partenaire. Portrait irrésistible, mais en même temps peu reluisant d’un certain atavisme féminin, cette satire au / du féminin résonne comme une mise en garde faite aux filles. AbstractIn Crimes et chatouillements, Hélène Monette offers an ironic interpretation of the vagaries of married life. A romantic comedy that shares more in common with the unavoidably tragic, this book reveals an investigation into shared life that should be examined from a feminine perspective: in this race toward happiness where there are only losers, it seems in fact that the woman is always slightly more hurt than her partner. An irresistible portrait that is at the same time mediocre due to a certain female atavism, this satire, which is to be read from a feminine perspective and about, to a certain extend, feminine behaviour resonates as a cautionary tale for women.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.612
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.340
Teacher spread0.318 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnalyses Revue de littératures franco-canadiennes et québécoiseSame topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchFrench-language works237,207