Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au début de la période que l’on appelle moderne, l’exploration et la colonisation européenne du monde soulevèrent un problème à la fois cognitif et communicationnel : comment transmettre au public du Vieux Continent l’idée de la nature exotique que l’on découvrait dans les « Indes » orientales et occidentales ? Confronté à cette question, le discours de voyage européen de la première modernité déploya toute sorte de signes, textes et discours censés évoquer, chez leurs énonciataires, un effet de sens double, combinant de façon paradoxale un sentiment de vraisemblance et une impression de merveille. L’analyse comparée des mots, des images, et des index de ce discours relève d’une question théorique outre qu’historique : on y lit en filigrane l’élaboration progressive de l’épistémè européenne moderne, celle où des types de signes différents agencent de façons diversifiées la relation entre réel et sens, vérité et vraisemblance. C’est le sujet dont s’enquiert cet article, en jetant un regard sémiotique sur des ouvrages tels que les Relations de divers voyages curieux de Melchisédec de Thévenot.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".