« Je ne partage évidemment aucune de tes conceptions de ce que sera le ton de la revue ». Andrée Maillet et Amérique française, 1947-1951 : un combat pour l’autonomie de la création littéraire
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La fin des années 1940 est souvent présentée comme un moment de transition dans le champ littéraire canadien-français, illustré, entre autres, par la querelle de « La France et nous ». La vie interne des revues littéraires, en explorant les relations intimes qui unissent ou séparent ceux qui « écrivent ensemble », peut aussi servir d’observatoire de ces moments de rupture. C’est le cas de la revue de création littéraire Amérique française, qui fait l’objet d’une intense discussion épistolaire entre Corinne Dupuis-Maillet, la nouvelle propriétaire, et sa fille Andrée Maillet. L’exploration de cette correspondance montre comment Andrée, en opposant sa vision de la création littéraire à celle de sa mère, se trouve à exposer ses propres idées sur l’autonomie de la littérature, qui la guideront lorsqu’à son tour, elle prendra la tête de la revue en 1951 et lui redonnera son prestige d’antan.
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 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".