Une visite de la littérature narrative française au présent (1980/2007)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On peut difficilement présenter la littérature française au présent sans prendre parti, en tant que lecteur, professeur et critique, en tant qu’animal raisonnablement cultivé, ce que je tenterai de faire avec détermination et circonspection. Détermination, s’il s’agit d’affirmer qu’il existe bel et bien aujourd’hui une littérature vivante en France. Un discours convenu affirme pourtant volontiers le contraire. On stigmatise souvent, ici ou là, le formalisme et le narcissisme des romans actuels, leur perte de liens avec l’histoire de leur temps, leur déficit d’imaginaire. On fait parfois, là ou ici, de cette faillite le symptôme d’une déclin plus général, celui d’une culture dont au regard de son prestige passé on déplore la mort en cours, tantôt avec les larmes d’Andromaque tantôt avec celles d’un crocodile. Mais de quelles littératures, et de quels états de culture, parle-t-on au juste?
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.022 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.038 | 0.004 |
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".