MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060366129 · doi:10.7202/044532ar

Tintin avant Tintin

2010· article· fr· W2060366129 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Guillaume Pinson

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes françaises · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article entend répondre à une question : que doit Tintin à la fiction du xixe siècle ? Un long processus historique mène de la progressive autonomisation de la figure du reporter au héros du Petit Vingtième. D’abord déconsidéré, consacré aux basses tâches du journal, le reporter est à l’origine un fait diversier qui hante la ville à l’affût de petits événements à noter. Peu à peu, son champ d’action s’élargit, son rayonnement géographique grandit et son statut au sein d’un journal en voie de professionnalisation, autour de 1900, acquiert ses lettres de noblesse, jusqu’à détrôner le chroniqueur dans la hiérarchie du journal. À la même époque, ce succès est nettement perceptible à travers une série de romans : Michel Strogoff et Claudius Bombarnarc de Jules Verne (1876 et 1893), Le Sieur de va-partout de Pierre Giffard, oeuvre située à mi-chemin entre la fiction et le témoignage (1880), La vie des frelons de Charles Fenestrier (1908) et surtout la série de Rouletabille de Maurice Leblanc (1907) — elle-même précédée par un feuilleton méconnu, paru dans Le Matin en 1900 : Que faire ? de Desnard (et son nègre Apollinaire). La lecture de ces romans montre d’une part que la professionnalisation du reporter est en phase avec un processus de délittérarisation des enjeux que porte la fiction du journalisme, et d’autre part que s’inventent à cette époque les procédés poétiques et thématiques qu’Hergé reprendra et adaptera aux contraintes spécifiques de la bande dessinée.

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)0.008
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.153

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.006
Scholarly communication0.0130.007
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.011

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.214 · 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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes françaisesSame topicComics and Graphic NarrativesFrench-language works237,207