Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'errance, notion polysémique, revêt au XVIIe siècle, une multitude de formes. Elle peut renvoyer aux déplacements sans destination précise des vagabonds et des peuples errants comme aux va-et-vient des voyageurs ou des promeneurs égarés. Si elle est le fruit d'incertitudes, voire d'erreurs, elle n'a pas toujours une signification négative. Ainsi, l'errance prend parfois l'allure d'un parcours initiatique, d'une quête. Les articles réunis dans le présent ouvrage examinent de multiples représentations de l'errance comprise tant dans sa dimension spatiale que métaphorique, qu'il s'agisse des hésitations des philosophes, des théologiens et des écrivains, des doutes des mystiques ou encore des dérives des amoureux. Dans ses nombreux investissements littéraires et symboliques, l'errance se révèle un motif fécond, qui permet d'aborder sous un angle nouveau les textes du Grand Siècle. Le présent volume est issu des travaux du 45e congrès annuel de la North American Society for Seventeenth-Century French Literature (NASSCFL) qui s'est tenu à Québec du 4 au 6 juin 2015.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 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".