Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’absence de la poésie lyrique dans la poétique d’Aristote et longtemps après a permis et exigé la rédaction d’innombrables « arts poétiques », dont les fonctions, les contenus et la place dans l’oeuvre poétique n’ont cessé de varier. La perte d’autorité sociale du discours littéraire et la relégation du lyrique loin derrière la fiction narrative ont à la fois entraîné un développement potentiellement illimité du métapoétique au détriment de toute référence au monde et sauvé, parfois, le poème, de sa dissolution dans la prose. De la hantise et de la fascination du silence, chez Rilke, au retour d’un sujet souverain de ses incertitudes chez Guillevic, on constate le manque de la voix de l’autre, d’une voix autre que celle du sujet esseulé. Dire le manque ne suffit pas. La tâche du poème aujourd’hui serait de bâtir un espace pour cette voix et de faire en sorte qu’art poétique et poème du monde jouissent, eux aussi, chacun de son tour de parole.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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.
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".