Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’autofiction chez Nelly Arcan, en plus de mettre en scène l’union atypique, bien que déjà vue, de l’écriture et de la prostitution, donne l’impression d’être tout entier un rassemblement de pensées opposées, incompatibles, en désordre. S’opposer à soi-même peut montrer l’existence d’un esprit critique, en plus de la capacité à pousser celui-ci au-delà du simple débat entre amis. La critique négative et la négativité de la critique pénètrent profondément le processus d’écriture dans les autofictions d’Arcan, Putain et Folle, et cette dernière possède définitivement un esprit critique. Par contre, celui-ci ne semble pas la source des oppositions qui caractérisent sa plume. La poétique de l’auteure semble en effet être fondée sur l’utilisation constante d’une série de contradictions. C’est dans la tension de l’exploration de ces contradictions, de la force de cette dialectique négative, qu’Arcan tente de faire éclater le sens des préjugés, de ce qui a été jugé d’avance sans aucun esprit critique, afin d’atteindre une conception et une compréhension qui seraient plus authentiques.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| 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".