MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2806762979 · doi:10.7202/1045596ar

L’accompagnement du lecteur dans Lointaines de Lise Gaboury-Diallo

2018· article· fr· W2806762979 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Samantha Cook

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers franco-canadiens de l Ouest · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article examine les liens avec le lecteur que tissent les narrateurs multiples de Lointaines. Le recueil de nouvelles de Lise Gaboury-Diallo voit le jour en 2010 et il se distingue notamment par son approche innovatrice envers les thèmes du voyage, du dépaysement et de l’inconnu, voire de l’inconnaissable. Le décor de chaque nouvelle est soit le Sénégal, soit le Mali, et les histoires se racontent à la première ou à la troisième personne. Tout en «guidant» un lecteur à qui l’Afrique est supposément assez étrangère, les narrateurs laissent beaucoup de place au mystérieux. Si la narratrice-voyageuse franco-manitobaine reste consciente de sa compréhension partielle des situations dans lesquelles elle se trouve, les je identifiables aux habitants ne prétendent expliquer leurs expériences de manière définitive non plus. L’ambiguïté s’étend effectivement jusqu’au refus de trancher nettement entre ce qui fait partie du quotidien ordinaire et ce qui appartient à l’au-delà. En même temps, la coexistence des voix narratives multiples fait écho au respect de la diversité qui permet l’expression authentique.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.945
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.218 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers franco-canadiens de l OuestSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207