Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article se penche sur Le romancier naïf et le romancier sentimental, transposition écrite des conférences de Charles Eliot Norton prononcées par Orhan Pamuk à l’Université Harvard en 2009, ainsi que sur D’autres couleurs, recueil d’essais portant en partie sur l’art du roman et l’oeuvre de romanciers importants tels que Sterne, Dostoïevski, Tolstoi, Mann, etc. Il s’agit de montrer comment la pensée de Pamuk sur l’art du roman est profondément scindée, mise en tension par une série de contradictions irrésolues. Par exemple, l’auteur, qui veut présenter le roman comme un genre autosuffisant — capable de s’engendrer et de se penser lui-même —, se montre néanmoins féru de théorie littéraire et désireux d’exposer ses idées dans des genres non fictionnels. L’article en vient à proposer une lecture montrant comment le dynamisme propre au genre romanesque naît justement de cette instabilité et de cette irrésolution qui se laissent lire dans les méandres de la pensée élaborée par le Prix Nobel de littérature.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".