MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075741822 · doi:10.4000/palimpsestes.122

La traduction de l’adjectif composé dans The Picture of Dorian Gray d’Oscar Wilde

2007· article· fr· W2075741822 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePalimpsestes · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGray (unit)PhilosophyHumanitiesMedicineNuclear medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Comment sont traduits en français les adjectifs composés métaphoriques du roman d’Oscar Wilde ? Traduire Wilde, c’est prendre en compte le texte dans son intégralité et ne pas sous-estimer les références intertextuelles et métatextuelles qui sont, en partie, la clé des adjectifs métaphoriques qui parsèment le roman. On s’intéressera en particulier aux adjectifs de couleur ou évoquant des motifs floraux qui jouent un rôle de « déjà-vu / déjà-lu » dans le roman et obligent les traducteurs à un travail constant de recherche d’équilibre entre répétition et créativité.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.919
Threshold uncertainty score0.608

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.022
GPT teacher head0.271
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