Arriver dans la colonie : distance et littérature. Variations autour d’un motif sous la Troisième République, du journal au livre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Quelles sont les modalités qui permettent au lectorat de l’époque coloniale d’entrer, littérairement parlant, dans l’empire colonial français? Sous la Troisième République, la question est importante pour des raisons politiques et idéologiques : on verra ici, à travers trois cas particuliers, comment les entrées dans les textes engagent différemment l’expérience d’une lecture exotique. Comparer ces premières lignes issues du livre ou des périodiques permet de mettre en évidence les variations de l’aventure coloniale et de sa modernité par le biais de la vitesse narrative : un récit de voyage, un roman d’aventure de Jules Verne et un reportage d’Albert Londres trouveront ainsi des points communs qui éclairent l’entreprise coloniale. Selon que les récits ont été publiés dans des journaux ou dans des livres, la vitesse de lecture n’est pas la même, le support jouant un rôle considérable dans la perception de l’aventure elle-même.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".