Bibliographic record
Abstract
Se fondant sur l’examen des romans africains produits des origines à nos jours, la contribution analyse la relation entre le roman africain et le phénomène de la totalité. À la suite du contexte tumultueux de son émergence, le roman africain traduit une grande ambition de totalité qui s’exprime à travers la volonté d’édifier quelque chose de grand comme d’atteindre à une vérité. Il contient une masse importante d’informations qui fait penser à l’inflation médiatique contemporaine, amenant à cribler l’espace de la représentation qui entre en concurrence avec un réel expansionniste et se démultipliant. Mais le réalisme abouti du roman africain est animé par une extraordinaire énergie figurative et scripturale, et il n’y a pas deux romans qui soient semblables. Parmi les stratégies utilisées, on reconnaîtra que la digression égare le texte en des détails et des détours, rendant ainsi compte d’un roman qui s’est développé par dilations successives.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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".