Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’essor de la production poétique au Québec s’avère parfois difficile pour certains d’y aborder, le public autrefois intéressé se laissant impressioner par son évolution accélérée ; mais, en connaissant la place qu’occupe la poésie québécoise dans l’histoire, on apprécie mieux les poètes et leur poésie. L’histoire de la poésie québécoise se déroule selon des étapes bien distinctes jusqu’à nos jours et c’est surtout l’histoire selon Jean Royer qui donne un aperçu de l’ensemble des voix et des oeuvres marquantes. Le présent discours n’a d’autre but que de commenter l’itinéraire de la poésie québécoise, à partir duquel le goût personnel pourrait enfin se prendre. The surge of poetic production in Quebec sometimes proves difficult to get into, the otherwise interested public intimidated by its rapid evolution; yet, by learning the place that Québécoise poetry holds in history, one comes to better appreciate the poets and their poetry. The history of Québécoise poetry unfolds by rather distinct stages from its origins up till now and its history overall, according to Jean Royer, which gives insight into the group of voices and vital works. The present talk has no other aim but to discuss the path that Québocise poetry has led, whence personal taste can finally take off.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 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".