« Où est l’univers concentrationnaire? » : Le Devoir et les paradigmes de la censure (1920-1960)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Jusqu'au tournant des années vingt, la censure se laisse assez aisément circonscrire; un censeur, en l'occurrence le clergé, domine presque tout le paysage culturel. Cependant, entre les années vingt et les années soixante, des mutations formidables amènent le clergé à composer avec l'État, un partenaire qui s'attaque entre autres au cinéma et aux Comic books, tandis que s'affirme progressivement un pouvoir laïc qui s'opposera résolument au contrôle de la pensée. Or, avant la Révolution tranquille, quelles ont été les phases de l'effritement du pouvoir ecclésiastique? Peut-on identifier l'émergence d'un nouveau discours, d'un nouvel ordre des choses? Mais surtout, où trouver un témoin fiable de la période entre 1920 et I960? C'est au moyen de l'étude de quelque 300 articles touchant la censure dans le journal Le Devoir que cet article tente de répondre à ces questions et, surtout, de proposer un cadre d'interprétation de cette période, fondé sur deux grands paradigmes, dogmatique et promotionnel.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".