MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044162285 · doi:10.7202/038826ar

Les possédés et les dépossédés

2010· article· fr· W2044162285 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurent Demanze

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes françaises · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sociologues et historiens de la famille décrivent la modernité comme la perte des communautés traditionnelles qui soudaient l’un à l’autre l’héritier et ses ancêtres. Pour s’inventer librement, l’individu moderne rompt les entraves du passé, mais cette libération est aussi vécue chez les écrivains contemporains avec culpabilité. Afin d’y remédier, ils font une place à la fois inquiétante et fondatrice aux spectres et aux revenants de la généalogie, qui étayent et disloquent la parole de l’héritier. C’est ainsi que Sylvie Germain et Jean Rouaud, Gérard Macé, Pierre Michon et Pierre Bergounioux sont des écrivains hantés. Ce sont autant d’héritiers dont les gestes reconduisent des vies antérieures, et dont les mots sont comme magnétisés par les parlures ou les inflexions des parents. Ces héritiers sont donc en quelque sorte à la fois dépossédés d’un passé familial qui n’est pour eux que ruines et deuil et possédés par ces êtres absents qui obsèdent leur conscience et parasitent leur parole. L’héritier est alors déchiré par la mélancolie, au point de se faire tombeau de ses ascendants. À travers la thématique spectrale, la littérature contemporaine analyse toute la situation ambivalente de l’individu contemporain, à la fois orphelin et parricide d’un passé familial, et les secousses inconscientes et linguistiques de cette perte.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0230.003

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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.249 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations11
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes françaisesSame topicDiverse Cultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207