Penser la radio en littéraire : quelques questionnements de radiolittérature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Depuis une vingtaine d’années, le médium radiophonique est entré dans le champ des recherches littéraires en France. La mine d’or que constituent les archives radiophoniques est loin d’être épuisée. Cet article ne vise pas à dresser un nouvel état des lieux des savoirs constitués sur les relations entre radio et littérature, mais plutôt à formuler quelques-uns des enjeux qu’il y a à s’intéresser, d’un point de vue littéraire, au médium radiophonique. Que vient en effet chercher le littéraire dans ce type d’archives sonores, et que peut-il y trouver ? Des œuvres bien sûr – car la radio a ouvert aux écrivains un riche domaine d’expression et de création – mais aussi l’occasion de déplacer les points de vue et les questionnements littéraires habituels, en abordant la littérature sous l’angle de ses médiations, en pensant davantage sa dimension sonore, tant dans ses formes, ses effets que ses valeurs propres.
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 | 0.009 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.033 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".