Jean-Philippe Beaulieu, Diane Desrosiers-Bonin, a cura di, Hélisienne de Crenne. L’écriture et ses doubles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les Œuvres (1543) di Hélisienne de Crenne, alias Marguerite Briet, rappresentano una tappa importante per lo sviluppo delle forme narrative in Francia nella prima metà del Cinquecento.Il volume, realizzato con la collaborazione dell'équipe GARSE-XVI (Groupe d'Analyse et de Recherche sur l'Écriture féminine au XVI e siècle , McGill University -Université de Montréal), raccoglie recenti contributi consacrati alla sua opera.In particolare, gli interventi sono incentrati sull'azione delle dinamiche della ripresa e dell'intertestualità nelle Angoysses douloureuses qui procedent d'amours (1538), nelle Epistres familieres et invectives (1539) e nel Songe de Madame Helisenne (1540), testi che costituiscono il corpus dell'autrice, oltre a una traduzione dei primi quattro libri dell'Eneide (1541).Ad apertura del volume, una presentazione dei curatori traccia le linee della fortuna di Hélisienne de Crenne (JEAN-PHILIPPE BEAULIEU, DIANE DESROSIERS-BONIN, Les jeux du même, de l'autre et du multiple chez Hélisienne de Crenne, pp.9-17).2 La prima serie dei contributi qui raccolti è dedicata al roman sentimental Les Angoysses douloureuses qui procedent d'amours, letto anzitutto a partire dal tessuto retorico dell'opera e dalle implicazioni religiose e giudiziarie della rhétorique de l'aveu: VIRGINIA
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".