MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2125193187 · doi:10.7202/015885ar

Répercussions violentes : Échos de l’oeuvre de Thomas Bernhard

2007· article· fr· W2125193187 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simon Harel

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Poetry
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bien que le motif de l’écho ne soit pas abordé de manière littérale dans l’oeuvre de Thomas Bernhard, il est présent sous sa forme liminale. Le protagoniste de La Plâtrière, personnage misanthrope qui rédige un traité sur l’ouïe depuis des décennies, est sensible aux moindres répercussions de la voix humaine. Chaque son entendu par Konrad est accompagné de sa trajectoire vibratoire, ce qui crée un sentiment de désespoir profond tant la quête du silence est un exercice difficile. Dans le cadre de cet article, nous interrogerons les formes dysphoriques de l’écho : ce dernier peut représenter un monde où la répercussion violente de l’entendu provoque l’irritation. Face à ce déferlement sensoriel, dont l’écho est l’une des modalités, le sujet n’a d’autre choix que de se cloîtrer dans une maison dont il espère qu’elle l’isolera enfin du monde des vivants. De plus, la présence de tout sujet-destinataire (en l’occurrence la femme de Konrad) est la source d’une distraction sonore. Le protagoniste entend dans toute voix un écho lancinant qui retarde le mouvement de sa pensée. Il tuera sa femme, ce qui s’avère un acte criminel où le « sémanticide » apparaît de plus comme une façon d’en finir avec la présence de la voix dans le langage.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.238 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicFrench Literature and PoetryFrench-language works237,207