MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2157966611 · doi:10.7202/008501ar

Péculat biographique et enchevêtrement générique

2004· article· fr· W2157966611 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Robert Dion, Frances Fortier

Bibliographic record

VenueProtée · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude examine les divers phénomènes de transposition qui se trouvent au principe de l’ouvrage de Thomas De Quincey intitulé Les Derniers Jours d’Emmanuel Kant (1827). La première partie révèle la singularité essentielle de ce texte qui a longtemps été attribué à De Quincey lui-même alors qu’il n’était, de fait, que la reprise intégrale, en traduction, d’ Immanuel Kant in seinen letzten Lebensjahren (1804), œuvre du secrétaire de Kant, Wasianski. Ce matériau biographique se voit transposé par l’ajout d’un appareil de notes qui vient gauchir le statut proprement factuel du texte et lui donner une tonalité ironique ; les diverses traductions françaises du texte de De Quincey viendront d’ailleurs encore épaissir le palimpseste. La seconde partie de l’étude met en lumière, à partir de traits textuels majeurs (brouillage énonciatif, télescopage des temps, etc.), toute une série de transpositions proprement génériques qui interfèrent avec les genres mineurs, en vogue à l’époque, du recueil d’anecdotes, des mémoires et du tombeau. En fin de compte, Les Derniers Jours d’Emmanuel Kant apparaissent comme le détournement délibéré, sur les plans diégétique, discursif et axiologique, des traits prototypiques de la biographie.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.049

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Citations3
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProtéeSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207