MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213025337 · doi:10.4000/fixxion.676

Ne pas s’attarder

2021· article· fr· W4213025337 on OpenAlexaff
Isabelle Daunais

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue critique de fixxion française contemporaine · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La fiction contemporaine produit un grand nombre de personnages dont la caractéristique est de rester peu longtemps en scène. Sans être secondaires, ils se définissent par la brièveté de leur présence et de leur récit, comme s’il s’agissait pour eux de laisser le moins de trace possible ou de rester en retrait d’une trame qui se poursuit sans eux et même sans leur souvenir. Repérable chez des auteurs aussi divers que Jean Echenoz, Maylis de Kerangal, Marie NDiaye, Tanguy Viel, Pierre Michon ou Patrick Modiano, cette furtivité du personnage contemporain prend diverses formes : celle de vies dont seuls quelques segments nous sont présentés, celle d’un renvoi hâtif de certains personnages hors de l’action et du récit, celle de vies condensées. Les raisons qui peuvent expliquer cette brièveté sont elles aussi multiples, entre effort de réalisme (nous ne connaissons le plus souvent de ceux qui nous entourent qu’une partie de leur vie), marque de fiction (en opposition à la matière biographique et autobiographique qui définit une part importante de la littérature contemporaine) ou poursuite d’un soupçon qui pèserait encore sur l’instance qu’est le personnage par-delà les “retours” au réel et à l’intrigue qu’aurait opérés la fiction au cours des dernières décennies.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
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 score0.046
Threshold uncertainty score0.152

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0090.010
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0460.027

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue critique de fixxion française contemporaineSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207