MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2786946515 · doi:10.4000/books.pum.4700

Figures oubliées ? L’arpenteur et le navigateur ou les suites de l’« affaire LaRue »

2012· book-chapter· fr· W2786946515 on OpenAlexaff
Dominique Garand

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooks · 2012
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCaribbean and African Literature and Culture
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Labour, Employment and Social Solidarity
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Est-il possible qu’une polémique ayant fait autant de bruit en 1997 soit aujourd’hui pratiquement oubliée, à tout le moins ignorée des jeunes générations ? Même le discours critique ne semble pas avoir jugé bon de retenir les figures de l’arpenteur et du navigateur comme coordonnées imaginaires du passage entre deux états de l’institution littéraire québécoise. Le but de ce chapitre n’est pas de leur redonner vie, mais d’interroger leur pertinence et leur portée. Je proposerai d’abord une ré...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.300
Threshold uncertainty score0.597

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0120.021
Scholarly communication0.0110.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.004

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses de l’Université de Montréal eBooksSame topicCaribbean and African Literature and CultureFrench-language works237,207