Bibliographic record
Abstract
Que signifie inventer en poésie ? En quoi un poème serait-il l’objet d’une invention ? De Joachim du Bellay à Francis Ponge, on s’efforce de tirer un fil dans l’histoire de la poésie où l’invention poétique, en général, devient l’invention d’un poème en particulier : l’invention d’un objet au sein d’un genre lui-même toujours à inventer. On s’intéresse ainsi au fonctionnement du poème et au principe de sa mise en marche, un fonctionnement organique où le lecteur joue un rôle essentiel de déclencheur, d’« agent commutateur » comme le dit Ponge. Dès lors, la poésie n’apparaît plus seulement comme un art du faire, elle est également toute entière tournée vers son à-venir que soutient et que rend possible toute lecture ; aussi son invention (son invenire) est-elle toujours cet avoir-lieu qui n’a jamais lieu, elle est ce qui arrive au poème et fait de lui l’objet de cet avènement que réactive chaque lecture.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".