MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366598705 · doi:10.5206/mf.v7i1.16419

Les tendances culturelles dans deux œuvres romanesques d’Ahmadou Kourouma

2023· article· fr· W4366598705 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Adisa Akinkorede SOMANA, Olaosebikan Timothy Ojo Wende

Bibliographic record

VenueMouvances Francophones · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Studies and Ethnography
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les tendances culturelles révèlent l’originalité et la réalité des œuvres littéraires africaines francophones vis-à-vis de la philosophie, de la politique, de la religion, de l’économie et de l’organisation socioculturelle des peuples d’Afrique. Les œuvres littéraires d’Ahmadou Kourouma ont fait l’objet d’un large discours académique, en particulier dans le monde francophone, mais peu d’attention a été accordée aux tendances culturelles de ses œuvres parmi les chercheurs anglophones. Cette recherche vise donc à examiner les tendances culturelles telles que le personnage du griot (chanteur de louanges), la circulation de la parole, les noms totémiques, les initiations et les alliances « à plaisanteries » vers une analyse approfondie de leur pertinence pour le développement des œuvres. La théorie sociologique, qui considère le travail de l’auteur comme un reflet de la société, est adoptée comme cadre théorique. Deux romans, Les soleils des indépendances ainsi que Monnè, outrages et défis d’Ahmadou Kourouma sont choisis à dessein en raison de leur richesse en culture malinké.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.010
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMouvances FrancophonesSame topicAfrican Studies and EthnographyFrench-language works237,207