Bibliographic record
Abstract
Francis Ponge n’a pas partagé l’enthousiasme moderniste de Cendrars, Cocteau ou Mac Orlan pour la publicité. Il la considérait comme une émanation de la société capitaliste qui réduit tout à sa valeur marchande. L’auteur du Parti-pris des choses sera pourtant conduit, par nécessité financière, non seulement à répondre aux sollicitations de la publicité mais à la solliciter à son tour. D’une part il signe des commandes de prestige pour de grandes entreprises, de l’autre il travaille en 1953-1954 dans une agence de publicité, l’OGEP, pour laquelle il rédige de manière anonyme divers projets inédits dont l’édition est actuellement en préparation (éd. Benoît Auclerc, Myriam Boucharenc et Gérard Farasse†). Il s’agit de présenter cet exceptionnel dossier d’archives dans une perspective principalement historique en le situant dans « l’histoire littéraire de la publicité », histoire qui quoique demeurée longtemps occultée s’avère aussi essentielle à la compréhension de l’histoire de la littérature qu’à celle de la publicité.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".