Provenzano (François), Historiographies périphériques. Enjeux et rhétorique de l’histoire littéraire en francophonie du Nord (Belgique, Suisse romande, Québec)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’histoire littéraire, on le sait depuis longtemps, n’est pas neutre : elle constitue à la fois un lieu de mémoire et un lieu de pouvoir. Tout y est affaire de classement, de hiérarchie, de canon. Elle institue le fait culturel en une sorte de nature transmise d’une génération à l’autre via l’école. Mais il y a longtemps aussi que la critique savante a entrepris de déconstruire les mécanismes propres aux manuels d’histoire littéraire, de mettre au jour leurs présupposés idéologiques et d’inte...
Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.
How this classification was reachedexpand
The three-model screen
all 5,600 screened works →All three models called this out of scope.
Book review of a volume on the rhetoric of literary historiography; commentary touching on scholarly practice, so contextual at most.
The work concerns literary historiography and francophone literature rather than research practice.
Book review of literary historiography in francophone literature; object is literary canons, not research practice.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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; 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".