MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995530721 · doi:10.4000/coma.294

La Transpoétique et le normatif chez Hédi Bouraoui

2014· article· fr· W1995530721 on OpenAlexaff
Abderrahman Beggar

Bibliographic record

VenueContinents manuscrits · 2014
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude de la transpoétique de Hédi Bouraoui traite des positionnements de l’auteur vis-à-vis de la norme littéraire et de son impact sur l’écriture. Nous sommes partis de l’idée d’horizon (selon Heidegger) pour montrer combien la création est porteuse du normatif à plus d’un égard. Le bon ou mauvais usage ne s’inscrit pas seulement sur le plan textuel. Il est symptomatique des rapports, souvent conflictuels, entretenus avec les normes en usage. Ce comportement est aussi lié à la conception du monde qui gère la création.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.101

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.012
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.295
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContinents manuscritsSame topicPolitical and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207