Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans le corpus testimonial produit par les survivants des camps de concentration nazis et du génocide des Juifs, on note un certain nombre de textes qui, pratiquant un mimétisme partiel, ne prétendent pas restituer fidèlement la réalité concentrationnaire, mais entendent s’interroger sur la qualité des souvenirs de cette réalité. On sent ainsi une tendance à se démarquer de ces traditions que sont le récit réaliste, la fonction référentielle et l’immersion fictionnelle. Leurs auteurs sont notamment Robert Antelme, Tadeusz Borowski, Charlotte Delbo, Zalmen Gradowski, Imre Kertész, Primo Levi, Piotr Rawicz. Ces textes portent en eux un potentiel critique. La présente étude vise à en dégager les principes stylistiques et les logiques sémantiques afin de mettre en évidence que le passage de l’expérience extrême dans le langage, en lequel consistent ces témoignages, répond à des exigences normatives et rationnelles, non à des questions d’indicibilité.
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 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".