« Le plus parfait ami qui fut jamais » : analyse topique de l’ami loyal dans le récit du XVIIe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
J’explore l’utilité de certains ressources et outils informatisés pour capter et ensuite analyser un certain nombre de topoï associés à l’amant devenu l’ami loyal (tomber amoureux de la femme de son ami; amitié entre un homme et une femme mariée; trahir ami(e) ou amant(e); fidélité/infidélité sentimentale après la mort d’un être aimé, etc.). Je verrai la gradation de l’honnête homme amant d’une femme qui se comporte de façon discrète et honorable (exemple - Aristandre de l’abbé d’Aubignac, 1664) à celui qui devient le directeur de conscience de la femme aimée et qui la protège (exemple - Amelonde de l’abbé d’Aubignac, 1669) jusqu’au cas extrême de l’amoureux qui sert les intérêts de sa maîtresse au point de faciliter sa liaison avec un autre (exemple - La princesse de Montpensier, Lafayette, 1662). Pour effectuer mon analyse, je me servirai des données contenues dans la base satorbase.org et de la version béta de l’outil Voyant, outil qui permet d’effectuer des recherches dans une série de textes intégraux et de relever des co-occurrences de termes-clés associés aux topoï en question.
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 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".