MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3154803508 · doi:10.7202/1075866ar

L’ÉCRITURE ET LE PHÉNOMÈNE POPULISTE

2021· article· fr· W3154803508 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stéphane Inkel

Bibliographic record

VenueVoix et Images · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La littérature québécoise contemporaine, comme celle d’ailleurs, prolonge en son sein nombre de litiges non résolus. Cet article voudrait soutenir qu’il existe aujourd’hui ce que la théorie politique appelle un « moment populiste », que la littérature cherche à cerner et à harnacher pour en déployer la logique propre. Si la philosophe Chantal Mouffe insiste sur la nécessité de garder la conflictualité fondamentale des rapports humains à l’intérieur des limites de l’espace démocratique, elle souligne également l’importance de « l’investissement libidinal » dans les processus d’identifications politiques. Dressant une véritable cartographie des frontières sociales et politiques, l’oeuvre de Lise Tremblay nous servira de guide dans l’interrogation de ces espaces conflictuels. Il s’agira ensuite d’analyser les figures d’intercesseur que cette oeuvre, de même que certaines oeuvres de Maude Veilleux et d’Erika Soucy, mettent en scène afin de brouiller, voire in-déterminer, la ligne de partage constitutive des identités sociales et politiques. Des oeuvres capables d’interroger, depuis cette place intermédiaire, ambivalente et bien souvent inconfortable, le principe d’identification à l’oeuvre au sein des communautés représentées.

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 score0.582
Threshold uncertainty score0.842

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0190.026
Scholarly communication0.0080.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.001

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.269 · 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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVoix et ImagesSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207