MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Méprisé, mais pas méprisable – échec de la rhétorique de dissuasion dans Demain matin, Montréal m’attend de Michel Tremblay

2020· article· en· W3102423480 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sebastian Zacharow

Bibliographic record

VenueStudia Litteraria · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDramaturgyComedyArtStyle (visual arts)OperaRhetoricArt historyHumanitiesLiteraturePhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despised but not Despicable – Failure of the Rhetoric of Dissuasion in Demain matin, Montréal m’attend by Michel Tremblay In Demain matin, Montréal m’attend, a comedy by Michel Tremblay written in the era of a Quiet Revolution, contempt takes on an argumentative value. Lola Lee, a singer and artist in La Main –an artistic neighborhood in Montreal. Lola’s younger sister –Louise –is jealous of the popularity gained by her older sibling. Lola Lee, in the attempt to discourage Louise from the idea of following in her footsteps travels with her through the most infamous artistic venues. During this trip Louise meets artists with questionable morals. The aim of the article is firstly to show how this journey, instead of generating contempt, becomes the core of searching for your own artistic identity. Secondly, the article explains how Tremblay’s art, using metaphors in the style of Almodóvar, represent the national dramaturgy of Quebec, in which the hero, which is an allegory of the whole society, undergoes an evolution that allows him to appreciate his own identity instead of despising it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score0.775

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.023
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.234 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudia LitterariaSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207