MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2337712758 · doi:10.1177/0957155815617122

Jacqueline Duhême, l’imagière des poètes – une vie de rencontres hors pair

2016· article· fr· W2337712758 on OpenAlexaff
Jane Newland

Bibliographic record

VenueFrench Cultural Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ayant travaillé aux côtés d’Henri Matisse, de Paul Éluard, de Jacques Prévert et de Maurice Druon, l’envergure des rencontres culturelles de Jacqueline Duhême (1927–) est considérable. Ses images marquent indubitablement la littérature de jeunesse en France depuis l’illustration de son première œuvre de jeunesse de Paul Éluard, Grain d’aile, en 1951. Cet article résume la vie artistique de « l’imagière des poètes » en esquissant ses débuts difficiles, ses rencontres décisives avec Henri Matisse et ensuite Jacques Prévert et son passage chez le journal Elle. Parmi toutes les œuvres illustrées par Duhême, un texte se démarque : son petit album de jeunesse intitulé L’Oiseau philosophie (1997). Cet album carré, qui est le fruit d’une amitié profonde avec le philosophe Gilles Deleuze, réunit les images envoûtantes de Duhême et les extraits de Dialogues et Qu’est-ce que la philosophie ? de Deleuze et donne un aperçu exceptionnel des projets philosophiques deleuziens. Lors d’un entretien gentiment accordé en juillet 2012, Duhême témoigne de cette amitié avec Gilles Deleuze. Nous focalisons dans cet entretien sur cette amitié peu connue et nous mettons en relief ce texte souvent négligé par les chercheurs.

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)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.261
Teacher spread0.223 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrench Cultural StudiesSame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207