La fiction fragilisée : récit de voyage et recueil chez Henri Michaux et Italo Calvino
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le récit de voyage tend " naturellement " à la forme du recueil (recueil de lieux, de jours, de descriptions) et ce jusque dans les récits fictifs des voyages les plus imaginaires, qui vont puiser dans cette structure leur rythme et leur exposition. Mais, dans le cas de tels récits, pourquoi recourir à la forme du recueil qui semblerait a priori liée aux nécessités des " vrais " voyages et de leurs comptes rendus fidèles ? À travers les exemples d'Ailleurs de Henri Michaux et des Villes invisibles d'Italo Calvino, on peut poser l'hypothèse que le recueil sert à fragiliser la fiction : le recueil introduit dans le voyage fictif l'idée de discontinu, de limite au savoir et à l'observation, produisant ainsi un effet de réalité ; il introduit également des effets de virtualité, de multiplicité du voyage qui rendent incertaines et mobiles les frontières de la fiction.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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".