« Vivre chacune en ses amours contente » ou le paradoxe antérotique au coeur de la Querelle des Amyes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article se propose d’analyser le corpus de la « Querelle des Amyes » à l’aune du concept d’antérotisme. Celui-ci permet de saisir la dynamique éminemment paradoxale (à différents niveaux) des textes qui visent un lectorat féminin à instruire. Entre subversion et conformisme, des textes que l’on pensait s’opposer frontalement finissent par s’unir en proposant un parcours didactique en réalité aporétique, mais non sans valeur réflexive. La Querelle des Amyes ainsi envisagée rejoint de plain-pied le plus large corpus de la Querelle des Femmes, sans pourtant finir par prendre parti pour l’un ou l’autre des partis qui s’y affrontent. Clef de compréhension d’une lecture qui ne peut se saisir que comme un problème ou une promesse, Antéros dévoile la nature (possible) du sens de ces textes qui ne se révèle qu’en tenant ensemble des positions contradictoires et pourtant nécessaires les unes aux autres pour pouvoir être signifiantes.
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 | 0.003 | 0.009 |
| 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 | 0.014 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".