MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4301904413 · doi:10.3138/jeunesse.8.2.36

Pinocchio migrant et postcolonial : parcours de subjectivation entre Europe centrale, Italie, et Afrique

2016· article· fr· W4301904413 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Chiara Mengozzi

Bibliographic record

VenueJeunesse Young People Texts Cultures · 2016
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTranslation Studies and Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article porte sur deux récentes adaptations des Aventures de Pinocchio du célèbre écrivain italien Carlo Collodi : le roman Occhio a Pinocchio (2006) de Jarmila Očkayová, auteure italophone d’origine slovaque, et la pièce Pinocchio nero (2005), dirigée par Marco Baliani et interprétée par un groupe d’enfants des rues de Nairobi. Nous nous proposons de démontrer que ces deux auteurs, malgré les différences indéniables entre leurs œuvres (lieu de production et de réception, destinataire et genre littéraire), partagent la même stratégie postcoloniale à l’égard du « texte source » : ils s’approprient une œuvre du canon littéraire occidental en la transformant en une allégorie des procès de subjectivation/assujettissement des marginaux, qu’il s’agisse des (écrivains) immigrés en Italie ou des garçons de rue des bidonvilles kenyans. Notre approche des adaptations souhaite valoriser l’effet rétroactif que celles-ci peuvent avoir sur le texte de départ, notamment la capacité de dégager ou mettre en relief des significations négligées ou restées en marge des lectures précédentes du texte adapté. Nous aboutirons ainsi à une nouvelle interprétation du chef-d’œuvre de Collodi.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.014
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 designQualitative
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 venueJeunesse Young People Texts CulturesSame topicTranslation Studies and PracticesFrench-language works237,207