MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2587899329

Entre l’Amérique du Nord et l’Amérique du Sud : création d’un nouveau métarécit québécois dans trois romans d’Alain Beaulieu

2016· article· fr· W2587899329 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Simona Emilia Pruteanu

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Canadian Literature · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose un survol du concept de l’americanite et une exploration de ses implications sur le rapport de la francophonie quebecoise avec la France et le continent americain. A cette fin, il fait appel au recent concept d’ amerilatinite (Frederic Lesemann) qui reussit a surprendre le lien de parente entre la culture quebecoise et les cultures latino-americaines. Si l’amerilatinite ne nie pas le rapprochement du Quebec a un monde americain incluant les Etats-Unis, elle souligne davantage le lien de parente qui existe entre la culture quebecoise, d’origine latine, et les cultures latino-americaines. Une analyse textuelle de la trilogie d’Alain Beaulieu vient exemplifier ces propos et montrer comment cet auteur, quebecois d’origine, essaie de se placer en dehors d’une litterature nationale en « depaysant » ses personnages et l’imaginaire de ses romans. L’article soutient que ce genre de strategie litteraire relevant de l’ amerilatinite represente une alternative viable aux manieres de penser la francophonie en Amerique et qu’il aide a echafauder un nouveau metarecit quebecois.

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)0.002
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 score0.426
Threshold uncertainty score0.857

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0150.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.239 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Canadian LiteratureSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207