MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2885791051 · doi:10.7202/1048920ar

Régis Roy (1864-1944) ou la mise en vers de facéties du terroir

2018· article· fr· W2885791051 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Jean-Pierre Pichette

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennes · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldComputer Science
TopicCultural Insights and Digital Impacts
Canadian institutionsUniversité Sainte-Anne
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanitiesTerroirWine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Pour sa part, Jean-Pierre Pichette verse un nouveau chapitre au dossier de la transposition des récits oraux dans des oeuvres littéraires. À l’analyse des écrits destinés à la jeunesse de l’écrivaine Marie-Rose Turcot (Cahiers Charlevoix 3) et de l’ethnologue Marius Barbeau (Cahiers Charlevoix 4), il ajoute l’examen des « petits contes drolatiques » qu’un autre écrivain d’Ottawa, Régis Roy (1864-1944), a publiés entre 1906 et 1928. Cet auteur affirme avoir tiré « du terroir », donc lui-même entendu, les 132 récits brefs et amusants qu’il a mis en vers dans ses trois recueils. La rusticité de sa poésie découle nettement de la source populaire de son inspiration. Par la comparaison d’un échantillonnage de « petits monologues comiques en prose rimée » avec des variantes relevées dans la tradition orale canadienne-française, cette étude entend démontrer que les ingrédients de son humour sont vraiment les « bons mots du terroir ». En choisissant de mettre en vers des contes facétieux – fabliaux véritables fondés sur des sottises, ruses, quiproquos et calembours – Régis Roy s’est taillé une place originale dans le courant terroiriste de son temps.

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: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.410
Threshold uncertainty score0.816

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.007
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0170.003

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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers Charlevoix Études franco-ontariennesSame topicCultural Insights and Digital ImpactsFrench-language works237,207