Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le succès de Huis clos et la conférence de Jean-Paul Sartre à Montréal en mars 1946 suscitent un engouement pour Sartre. Le caractère public de l'événement et la division entre les intervenants catholiques entraînent une crise de la censure. L'impuissance des censeurs à interdire ou à contrôler la discussion les contraint à recourir à la dénonciation dissuasive et à l'arme du ridicule. D'autres catholiques prennent en compte la curiosité pour Sartre et en proposent une lecture « symptômale » et récupératrice d'un point de vue catholique. L'analyse d'une brèche importante mais brève dans le champ intellectuel montréalais des années quarante contribue à la compréhension des conditions de l'exercice du contrôle de l'opinion publique là où, grâce à l'action des journaux, la société civile acquiert une autonomie relative par rapport à l'institution religieuse.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 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".