Mutation et réemploi du roman historique. Entre fidélité et renouvellement d’une tradition au lendemain de la Première Guerre mondiale
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le roman historique populaire du début du XXe siècle se désenclave ostensiblement du giron du roman de cape et d’épée instauré par les succès dumasiens. La prise en compte de deux œuvres, L’Aiglonne, ciné-roman d’Arthur Bernède et La Comtesse de Cagliostro de Maurice Leblanc permet de mesurer la distance prise avec le modèle tutélaire des aventures historiques d’Alexandre Dumas. Cet article propose d’étudier les circonstances qui accompagnent la naissance de deux productions populaires révélatrices de l’évolution du roman historique traditionnel. L’Aiglonne d’Arthur Bernède renonce au Grand Siècle pour les campagnes napoléoniennes. La reconstruction historique en fiction prévaut ici sur la reconstitution de la scène et affiche ainsi clairement sa nature romanesque. Maurice Leblanc, de son côté, réintroduit la matière des romans historiques dans ses enquêtes policières soulignant de son côté une volonté évidente de faire de l’histoire et de l’histoire littéraire une réserve romanesque.
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".