MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2031511375 · doi:10.7202/1014251ar

La sémiose du texte érotique

2013· article· fr· W2031511375 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Pier-Pascale Boulanger

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches sémiotiques · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le récit érotique contemporain est un objet littéraire vilipendé qui exige pourtant la maîtrise d’un certain nombre de moyens afin d’accomplir sa visée : exciter le lecteur. L’article présente quelques considérations sur les modes de lecture du texte mais se concentre plutôt sur l’analyse et l’illustration des moyens lexicaux, syntaxiques et discursifs mis en oeuvre par les pornographes dans la trame narrative dans le but d’assurer le processus de sémiose érotique chez le lecteur. Les impératifs de clarté, de réalité et d’inventivité sont présentés comme des valeurs cardinales que le traducteur doit s’efforcer de rendre s’il aspire à produire un texte de jouissances.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.088
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRecherches sémiotiquesSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207