MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2081768218 · doi:10.7202/010528ar

Tableau et coup de théâtre

2005· article· fr· W2081768218 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Shira Malkin

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes littéraires · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtBourgeoisiePolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alors qu’elle écrit de front pour le roman et pour le théâtre dans le but de créer des fictions attendrissantes, George Sand emploie dans son roman Adriani (1853) les techniques du tableau et du coup de théâtre qu’elle emprunte au drame bourgeois inventé par Diderot et perfectionné par Sedaine. Marquée pour un temps par l’esthétique du pathétique que prisait le public du Second Empire, Sand en problématise les enjeux idéologiques, surtout en ce qui concerne le personnage féminin en état de crise. Alliant plusieurs modes de représentations dans l’espace même du roman, Sand en reproduit les codes pour ensuite proposer une autre finalité romanesque pour le sujet éploré.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.066

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0070.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0180.002

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.289
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

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes littérairesSame topicDiverse Cultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207