Thaddée Boulgarine et l'Abeille du Nord : Aux sources de la littérature de masse en Russie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La tradition de la lecture populaire en Russie remonte à la seconde moitié du XVIIIe siècle, quand à côté de nombreuses traductions des textes étrangers (majoritairement français) on voit apparaître les premiers spécimens populaires nationaux: les œuvres de Mikhaïl Tchoulkov, Matvej Komarov, Fiodor Emine, etc. Mais c’est Thaddée Boulgarine qui doit être considéré comme un vrai fondateur de la littérature de masse russe. Éditeur de la revue « L’Abeille du Nord », journal largement lu en Russie aux années 1820, et auteur du premier bestseller russe, Ivan Vyjiguine (1829), Boulgarine – figure de proue de la lecture populaire – a été violemment critiqué par Pouchkine et boudé par la critique soviétique ; ce n’est qu’à la fin du XXe siècle que son rôle dans l’évolution littéraire a été réévalué. Dans Ivan Vyjiguine Boulgarine construit, en combinant diverses traditions narratives, un modèle de la lecture d’évasion prétendant à une spécificité nationale.
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) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".