MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1910386345 · doi:10.29173/af25243

Sadegh Hedayat, un écrivain francophone iranien de l'entre-deux-mondes

2015· article· fr· W1910386345 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marzieh Balighi

Bibliographic record

VenueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONE · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophyEthnologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

En Iran, Sadegh Hedayat est un auteur important qui, le premier, a pris le chemin de la francophonie. Il fustige dans ses œuvres la société à laquelle il appartient et reste un écrivain controversé. Devenu solitaire et exclu de son pays d’origine, il s’exile en France où il crée ses œuvres les plus remarquables, mais toujours dans une marginalisation absolue. Il écrit en persan et en français avec un égal talent. Partir dans un autre pays et écrire dans la langue de l’autre sont en général ressentis comme une délivrance, mais Sadegh Hedayat n’a jamais pu rompre ni de sa langue maternelle ni de son pays d’origine. Cette attitude ambivalente se reflète dans son chef-d’œuvre La Chouette aveugle qui reste singulier et excentrique dans l’histoire littéraire iranienne. Cette œuvre semble s’être lovée dans la conscience des textes occidentaux et orientaux qui hante son écriture. En marge de deux sociétés à la fois – celle de la civilisation orientale et celle de la civilisation occidentale – Sadegh Hedayat se retrouve dans une solitude délibérément choisie. Ce présent article a pour objectif d’étudier la situation d’un écrivain iranien exilé qui est coincé entre deux mondes, l’Orient et l’Occident.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.003

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueALTERNATIVE FRANCOPHONESame topicPolitical and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207