Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sur les brouillons de Réjean DucharmeComment ne pas penser, devant les brouillons de Réjean Ducharme 1 , aux carnets et autres manuscrits évoqués dans ses romans, du cahier « pas cher » dans lequel Mille Milles consigne ses pensées dans Le Nez qui voque 2 , jusqu'au cahier trouvé dans un fossé où Johnny reconnaît sa propre histoire dans Gros mots 3 ?Survit ainsi dans le livre publié le geste intime de l'écriture, sa proximité et sa précarité qui, dans l'esthétique de Ducharme, s'opposent à la littérature et lui résistent.Relativement modeste, et assez peu exploité par les chercheurs pourtant nombreux à travailler sur l'œuvre, le Fonds Réjean-Ducharme ne contient, il est vrai, aucune révélation sur le mystère dont s'entoure l'écrivain.Mais si rien dans ces brouillons n'est de nature à transformer radicalement l'interprétation des textes parus 4 ni les contours de l'œuvre connue, leur lecture aide à ROMAN 20-50 -N°41 -JUIN 2006 -RÉJEAN DUCHARME
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".