Bibliographic record
Abstract
« Mythe inépuisable qui se prête à toutes les "lectures" » (J. Tulard), depuis plus de deux siècles Napoléon Bonaparte suscite des interprétations multiples qui ont fait couler beaucoup d’encre tout en divisant les chercheurs. À l’occasion du bicentenaire de sa mort, ce dossier thématique montre comment les deux faces du personnage – le héros et le scélérat – ont été représentées dans la production dramatique et les spectacles au sens le plus large du terme depuis le début de sa célébrité jusqu’à 1840, année du début de l’exploitation politique de la « légende ». Héros d’Italie et d’Égypte, homme de la Providence, général pacificateur, bon républicain qui a sauvé la Révolution, Cromwell ou César, Charlemagne ou Tibère aux facettes ambiguës, acteur, personnage historicisé, tyran, Arlequin grossier ou inventif et gagnant, héros vaincu : tout au long de ces décennies, les masques de Napoléon changent, s’échangent et se superposent selon l’évolution des contextes socio-politiques, les appartenances nationales, les opinions personnelles.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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.
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".