Nouvelle et cruauté dans les lettres de langue française de la fin du Xxe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette these etudie les rapports qui unissent la forme de la nouvelle et une inspiration resolument sombre et cruelle. Nous degageons les principales caracteristiques formelles et thematiques de la nouvelle cruelle , et montrons que ce type de fiction breve constitue un genre particulierement apte, pour l'ecrivain, a exprimer de maniere aigue les angoisses societales, politiques, morales, voire metaphysiques, de son temps. Pour ce faire, nous nous appuyons sur l'etude de nouvelles d'un ensemble diversifie d'auteurs francais, belges, suisses romands et quebecois, publiees durant les dernieres decennies du vingtieme siecle, une periode de crise des valeurs en Occident tres favorable pour la nouvelle cruelle . De maniere plus detaillee, nous analysons un corpus d'œuvres de cinq nouvellistes representatifs de cet important courant de cruaute au sein de la fiction breve des annees 1965-2005 : Marcel MARIEN, Jacques CHESSEX, Daniel WALTHER, Hubert HADDAD et Nadine MONFILS.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".