Yves Thériault et la fiction brève (Quatre remarques préléminaires à la réception des contes et nouvelles d'Yves Thériault comme objets d'étude)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sont ici proposées quatre remarques sur les formes brèves contes et nouvelles appliquées à la manière de Thériault. Un: l'oeuvre de Thériault est si diversifié, si fragmenté, Thériault a si souvent récupéré des parties de ses textes que l' advenir de son oeuvre le work in progress nous échappe presque totalement. Deux: : pour s'installer en écrivain devant l'institution, Thériault a choisi de fabuler sur le mode du conteur; cela détermine son usage de la fiction brève. Trois: Thériault, qui a commencé à écrire par oreille, a réussi à composer un style particulier, quasi artificiel, un style qui ne doit rien à personne en ce pays, mais qui peut être reçu par tous. Quatre: les personnages des fictions brèves de Thériault, sortis d'un pays qui n'est que très approximativement le nôtre, montrent une langue étale et peu représentative de l'usage qu'en font les Québécois, mais une langue évocatoire et oratoire qui participe à l'élaboration d'un monde proprement littéraire.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.005 |
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".