La réception d’un rêve. David Hackett Fischer au Québec et dans les francophonies nord-américaines*
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Publié aux éditions du Boréal, Le Rêve de Champlain de David Hackett Fischer est considéré comme un best-seller dans le marché du livre en français au Québec et en Amérique du Nord francophone. Selon l’éditeur, plus de 20 000 exemplaires de cette biographie historique auraient été vendus. Dans le cadre du marché du livre de langue française, comment un tel succès d’édition a-t-il pu se produire ? Deux dimensions en font un best-seller historique. La première est celle de l’oeuvre elle-même, une oeuvre qui, par la mobilisation des ressources de l’auteur et de l’éditeur, constitue un dispositif efficace. La seconde dimension relève du contexte de réception du livre, un contexte qui renvoie à l’écosystème du livre – son économie du tirage et ses milieux de lecture –, aux étapes de sa diffusion et aux enjeux mémoriels et politiques des sociétés francophones d’Amérique du Nord.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".