MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4247481172 · doi:10.3917/comla.188.0003

L’écriture de la transgression dans le cas d’un processus révolutionnaire

2016· article· fr· W4247481172 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication & langages · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsFrancophone University Association
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette étude s’inscrit dans le cadre de la compréhension du processus révolutionnaire égyptien durant lequel les manifestants exploitent la force du discours révolutionnaire représenté par les énoncés révolutionnaires scandés ou écrits. Ce discours est caractérisé par la transgression langagière traduite par l’humour et par l’alternance codique entre l’arabe standard et l’arabe dialectal. Ainsi, pendant ces différents soulèvements populaires qu’a connus l’Égypte entre 2011 et 2013, le fait humoristique, qui s’appuie essentiellement sur l’ironie, participe à la mise en évidence des principales revendications des Égyptiens. D’autre part, l’alternance codique traduit le renversement des rôles entre la masse, désormais en position haute, et le régime en place, en position basse.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunication & langagesSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207