Bibliographic record
Abstract
Note sur les citations et traductions xxvi 1 Les autrices en genre et en nombre : une communauté en construction 1 1 Siècle des femmes, siècle des autrices ? 2 2 Rivales, sœurs, agentes ?Pour une analyse féministe et imbriquée des relations entre autrices 7 3 Vers une (pré)histoire des féminismes ?11 4 Problématiser les relations entre autrices : qui, où, quand, quoi et comment ?16 5 Survol des chapitres 26 2 Débats sur les autrices et généalogies littéraires : une conjugaison au passé, au présent et au futur 28 1 De la querelle des femmes aux « bas-bleus » : l'autorat féminin contesté 31 2 Mettre en valeur pour légitimer 40 2.1 Des parallèles avantageux 40 2.2 Une commémoration collective 45 3 Appels à l'action : de la défense des autrices à l'émulation 50 3.1 Défenses 51 3.2 Émulation 57 4 Appels à la prudence : vers un repli stratégique 61 4.1 En France : attaques orchestrées, ripostes convergentes 61 4.2 En Italie : une correspondance évocatrice sous le Triennio 70 5 Conclusion 74 3 De l'exception à l'émulation 78 1 Discours masculins sur l'exceptionnalité féminine en milieu littéraire 81 2 Catalogues de femmes (soi-disant) illustres : une nuisance pour la cause de l'autorat féminin ?84 Ève-Marie Lampron -9789004512238 Downloaded from Brill.
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 | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.803 | 0.615 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".