La sociabilité littéraire au Québec : de l’usage public de la raison à la reconnaissance d’une légitimité fondée sur un principe de compétence
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le présent article porte sur la relation entre le champ du pouvoir politique et le champ littéraire telle qu'on peut l'observer à travers les pratiques associatives publiques au Québec du XVIIIe jusqu'au début du XXe siècle. Il s'agit de mettre au jour des ressorts internes de fonctionnement et, surtout, d'évolution qui font se succéder des structures de sociabilité elles-mêmes influencées par des rapports de force propres à la constitution de l'espace public littéraire au Québec. Trois étapes retiennent plus particulièrement notre attention: d'abord l'usage public de la raison et la valorisation du champ intellectuel au lendemain de la Conquête; la formation de l'opinion publique et la valorisation du champ littéraire dans la seconde moitié du XIXe siècle et, finalement, la reconnaissance d'une légitimité fondée sur un principe de compétence à la fin du XIXe siècle.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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".