Bibliographic record
Abstract
Prenant appui sur les travaux de Pierre Nora, de Jacques Le Goff, de Michel de Certeau, de Paul Ricoeur et de Michel Foucault, cet article évalue les conditions de possibilité d’une histoire littéraire des Canadiens au xviiie siècle. Comment, de nos jours, « faire de l’histoire », comment « inventer une littérature » à partir d’un corpus hétérogène d’archives manuscrites et imprimées dont les auteurs n’avaient pas toujours conscience de « faire oeuvre » ni de passer à la postérité ? Quelle mémoire pouvons-nous opposer aujourd’hui à l’oubli dans lequel l’institution littéraire a longtemps plongé cette production ? De Lahontan à Bailly de Messein, en passant par Charlevoix, Lafitau, Bégon, mais aussi les textes de la Conquête, la richesse et la variété de cette archive justifient-elles vraiment notre entreprise d’exhumation ?
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.027 | 0.022 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.017 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".