Les enjeux politiques de la présence de l’Amérique dans le Mercure galant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comment déterminait-on si un récit ou une nouvelle concernant l’Amérique devait trouver sa place dans le Mercure galant à l’époque de Louis XIV ? Le fonctionnement interne ordinaire du périodique privilégié demeure hélas particulièrement opaque. Dans cet article, trois lieux d’observation permettent d’apercevoir les enjeux entourant la publication de ces textes. Les pratiques d’écritures de nouvellistes proches du rédacteur Donneau de Visé, les pratiques documentaires du secrétariat d’État à la Marine et les pratiques de publication des périodiques de Hollande y sont analysées dans leurs interactions avec le Mercure . On y caractérise notamment le travail d’adaptation des scripteurs aux attentes du pouvoir ainsi que celui des « portiers » (gatekeepers) qui décident de l’opportunité de publier un texte.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".