MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3209897359 · doi:10.54481/intertext.2021.1.22

Romanian Francophony, the Beautiful Stranger

2021· article· en· W3209897359 on OpenAlexaff
Diana Gradu

Bibliographic record

VenueIntertext · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical and Social Issues
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanianFrenchChoseModernityDemocracyPoliticsFrench revolutionHistoryArt historySociologyArtHumanitiesClassicsPolitical scienceLawPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

French in Romanian space meant much more than mastering a linguistic instrument, being the expression of adherence to a whole series of values, ideas and ideals specific to modern European nations. Romanian intellectuals and political elites chose French as an idiom for the expression of freedom, modernity and the belonging of Romanian space to the Europe of free nations. The francophone dimension of Romania developed especially during the first half of the 20th century. It was at this time that Bucharest became little Paris”. Many Romanian writers then chose to create the most significant part of their work in French. Illustrious names, including those of Constantin Brancusi, Eugène Ionesco, Mircea Eliade, Georges Enesco, Emil Cioran, have since become part of the Francophone cultural heritage. The French-speaking component of Romanian history, built over two centuries of history, has been able to resist even under the conditions of great precariousness imposed under totalitarianism, after the Second World War. Immediately after the return of democracy, Romania joined, as a full member, the institutional Francophonie (1993), returning to the Francophone family to which it was attached in an extremely rich past.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.052
Threshold uncertainty score0.103

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 venueIntertextSame topicPolitical and Social IssuesFrench-language works237,207