Od „nie-miejsca” do „heterotopii”. Zagrożenie jako czynnik zmieniający status przestrzeni w "Dżumie" Alberta Camusa
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Words can create reality which is why they sometimes arouse fear in people, especially when they are denominations of threatening forces, unfavourable to men.
 In my article, I would like to discuss the problem of pestilence and the utterance hereof in Albert Camus’ Plague. Why did Dr. Rieux hesitate to clearly utter the threat? Why did other characters in the novel have no problem voicing “epidemic” out loud? And above all, what are the consequences of uttering a disease? How the word “plague” destroyed the existing spatial status of Oran as a non-place; how it became a gate to building a new spatial status structure based on a heterotopic labyrinth, which, from the moment of utterance of this terrible term, was completely subjugated to the plague. How does the word escape the doctor’s room? What is the role of the figure of window in the process of the name overcoming barriers and passing from the level of language to the level of reality? And finally, whether the rhythm analysis can become an answer, deafening and counteracting the still resounding threat contained in the word.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".