MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2626167545 · doi:10.7202/1040010ar

Ars poetica (in vitro) : réflexions sur le réarmement du poème

2017· article· fr· W2626167545 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Didier Coste

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.004
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.001

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 head0.291
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.026 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207