MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

« Et vous, pages parlantes, / Qui conservez nos noms à la postérité » : La place des poètes du xviie siècle dans l’histoire littéraire des bibliophiles

2022· preprint· fr· W4308111473 on OpenAlexaff
Marine Le Bail

Bibliographic record

VenueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe) · 2022
Typepreprint
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Au XIXe siècle, l’essor de la bibliophilie s’accompagne du développement d’un secteur éditorial à destination des amateurs. Ces deux activités s’affirment comme des modalités de réévaluation, voire de réécriture, de l’histoire littéraire institutionnelle. On souhaite s’intéresser à la place occupée par la poésie du XVIIe siècle au sein de cette histoire littéraire bibliophilique, et interroger le topos critique qui consiste à voir dans ce siècle une période d’étiolement de l’activité poétique.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.956
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.197 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHAL (Le Centre pour la Communication Scientifique Directe)Same topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207