Un panorama des théories esthétiques des XVIIIe et XIXe siècles „Théories esthétiques du romantisme à l’étranger”, sous la direction de Dominique Peyrache-Leborgne, Éditions Nouvelles Cécile Defaut, Nantes 2014
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce volumineux ouvrage collectif (570 pages) publi sous les auspices du Centre de Recherches L'Antique et le Moderne de Nantes fait certainement partie des publications de grande valeur scientifique, mais en plus, il est vritablement passionnant. Sous la direction de la professeur de littrature compare Dominique Peyrache-Leborgne, un groupe de chercheurs de son universit, de la Sorbonne et de plusieurs autres universits franaises et trangres y ont contribu 1 . Le rsultat est un livre qui prsente des caractristiques d'anthologie commente de textes esthtiques et programmatiques de l'poque romantique, mais aussi un panorama compar dpassant les frontires de l'Europe pour s'tendre au Canada francophone, l'Argentine et au Brsil. L'objectif dclar du volume Thories esthtiques du romantisme l'tranger est d'largir la connaissance de la culture du romantisme hors de France en prsentant en langue franaise des textes esthtiques, critiques, philosophiques, historiques et de la posie manifeste qui n'avaient pas encore t traduits ou taient absents du circuit scientifique. Ainsi, le livre s'inscrit dans le courant des synthses comparatives, anthologies et encyclopdies (la directrice du volume cite les travaux individuels ou collectifs de
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".