Bibliographic record
Abstract
André Belleau a publié d’importants travaux sur des questions de théorie littéraire. La série d’émissions « Regards neufs sur la littérature » (Radio-Canada, 1975), constituée d’entrevues avec d’éminents critiques : Fayolle, Genette, Todorov, Deguy, Cohen, Leenhardt, Barbéris, Richard, Starobinski, Robert et Jauss, témoigne du caractère profondément heuristique de la démarche de Belleau. Nous nous intéressons à la conception de la littérature qui est construite au fil de ces émissions, à leur caractère dialogique, dans l’esprit de Bakhtine, et aux enjeux théoriques explicités par André Belleau. La dimension dialogique de l’émission favorisant le travail sur le doute, les ambiguïtés et les apories y trouvent un lieu d’expression qui permet de passer d’une historicité qui sert d’horizon sur lequel projeter le travail sur les discours à une historicité qui sert d’ancrage à la subjectivité qui s’y trouve engagée. Nous montrons ainsi le rôle joué par André Belleau à titre de passeur littéraire, mais aussi l’originalité de sa pensée au moment où triomphe un certain structuralisme.
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 | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 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".