MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3146916013 · doi:10.1080/09639489.2021.1903845

Daily life in<i>Un Roman russe</i>and<i>L’Origine de la violence</i>

2021· article· en· W3146916013 on OpenAlexaff
Marla Epp

Bibliographic record

VenueModern & Contemporary France · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology Research
Canadian institutionsMacEwan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEveryday lifePrivilege (computing)Performative utteranceSociologyTRACE (psycholinguistics)BourgeoisieAestheticsGender studiesPoliticsArtPhilosophyEpistemologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the tensions between the banality of the everyday and a traumatic but unspoken family loss, which are at the centre of Un roman russe and L’Origine de la violence. I trace the ways in which the effects of the repressed family past manifest themselves in the routines of daily life, arguing that the everyday has become haunted by a transgenerational phantom, to use Abraham and Torok’s phrase. In these novels, the daily routines of the bourgeois families are not only a product of their social standing and privilege, but also a performative means of showcasing and creating this social position. I contend that the texts not only emphasize the ways in which the details of an individual’s quotidian actions are determined by class standing, but also ask to what lengths someone might go in order to protect or improve the day-to-day comforts of their family. Ultimately, I argue that quotidian experiences can be read as both the effects and the catalysts of many of the decisions surrounding moments of major upheaval—that is to say, that the exceptional event and the everyday cannot be easily disassociated.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.026
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern & Contemporary FranceSame topicPsychoanalysis and Psychopathology ResearchFrench-language works237,207