Entrecroisements d’humour et modernité dans la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle : le cas Dossi
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans les Note azzurre [Notes bleues] de Carlo Dossi se manifeste constamment l’intérêt de l’auteur pour l’humour. Cet intérêt se manifeste surtout dans le matériel rassemblé en vue du projet d’une Storia dell’umorismo [Histoire de l’humour] et d’autres œuvres similaires, comme les Note umoristiche di letteratura alta e bassa [Notes humoristiques de littérature haute et basse] ou Il libro delle bizzarrie [Le livre des bizarreries]. Dossi considère l’humour comme la seule perspective de connaissance (et seule ressource expressive) praticable dans la trame de la modernité. Parmi les ascendants européens de l’humour de Dossi, une place de choix est occupée par les « excentriques » allemands et anglais du XVIIIe siècle, auteurs de récits constellés de digressions paradoxales, de détails hypertrophiques, en premier lieu Jean Paul et Laurence Sterne. Deux autres grands modèles animent le discours théorique et narratif de Dossi : Alessandro Manzoni et Giuseppe Rovani. Or, Dossi met Manzoni et Rovani au service de ses idées et de sa pratique d’écriture : c’est pourquoi il se place lui-même, après ses deux auctores, comme point culminant de la parabole dessinée par l’hypothétique Storia dell’umorismo.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".