MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2130329153 · doi:10.7202/017468ar

Frankenstein et Les Ruines de Volney

2008· article· fr· W2130329153 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Johanne Lamoureux

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet essai souligne la valeur programmatique des lectures d’enfance des personnages du Frankenstein (1818) de Mary Shelley, et tout particulièrement les effets de l’exposition de la créature à la lecture de l’essai de C.-F. Volney, Les Ruines (1791). Il montre comment cette lecture renvoie le monstre à une scène primitive problématique et à son statut abhorré de « machine orpheline », fabriquée de fragments humains par un père célibataire. Mais l’auteur analyse aussi comment la ruine est posée comme telos du récit, le monstre se définissant peu à peu, devant l’isolement où il se voit confiné, comme agent ruiniste : celui qui porte la ruine et fait ainsi du créateur un être réduit à ressembler à sa créature. Comparant les signifiants de la ruine chez Volney et Shelley, le texte situe le devenir-monstre de la créature dans les agissements de celle-ci plutôt que dans le bricolage physiologique dont elle est le produit.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.413
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.215 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations2
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207