Bibliographic record
Abstract
La littérature maghrébine a toujours suscité des débats houleux quant au choix de la langue en tant que moyen de s’exprimer et d’écrire. Nombreux sont les écrivains et intellectuels qui se sont intéressés à la problématique de l’éthique relationnelle posée par les auteurs ayant choisi de quitter l’exil imposé par le colon en utilisant la langue française comme outil de rédaction. Conservant sa plume particulière, sa liberté de ton, sa propre expression, en dépit de la critique virulente des conservateurs, Driss Chraïbi parvient, grâce à cette langue, non seulement à vitupérer les travers de la colonisation, les aberrations du système marocain, mais, au-delà, à créer des ponts culturels, des connexions linguistiques et des échanges interreligieux entre le Maroc et la France. Dépassant la sphère de la crise identitaire, la langue du colonisateur a permis à l’écrivain de cultiver l’hétérogène, la différence, l’interculturel et la tolérance.
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 | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.003 |
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".