Littérature québécoise mobile: ré-imaginer les pratiques littéraires en culture numérique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé Le but de cet article est de présenter le point de départ d’une réflexion sur les théories et les pratiques en culture numérique – autour des enjeux associés à la transition numérique de la littérature québécoise –, notamment à travers des exemples de projets mis en œuvre grâce au partenariat Littérature québécoise mobile (LQM). Ce partenariat a été financé par le Conseil de recherche en sciences humaines du Canada pour une période de 5 ans (2019-2024). Il trouve sa raison d’être dans la volonté commune des chercheuses et chercheurs universitaires, des institutions et des organismes culturels et littéraires impliqués (plus de 25 partenaires), d’explorer et d’accompagner la transformation des pratiques d’écriture et de lecture, d’édition et de diffusion en contexte numérique, sur un plan critique, mais surtout sur un plan pratique, en travaillant avec les intervenants du milieu pour développer des stratégies et des postures adaptées au nouvel environnement et ainsi soutenir la transition numérique de milieux culturels. Le partenariat se déploie en deux volets : un volet littéraire, qui s’ouvre sur deux pôles distincts, le pôle Montréal et le pôle Québec, permettant ensemble de couvrir le plus grand nombre d’activités littéraires et d’intervenants du Québec; et un volet éducation, préoccupé par les formes de la littératie contemporaine et par la transformation des pratiques d’édition, de médiation et de réception en littérature numérique jeunesse.AbstractThe purpose of this article is to present the starting point for a reflection on theories and practices in digital culture—around the issues associated with the digital transition of Quebec literature—, particularly through examples of projects implemented through the Littérature québécoise mobile (LQM) partnership. This partnership was funded by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada for a period of 5 years (2019-2024). It finds its raison d'être in the common will of university researchers, institutions, as well as cultural and literary organizations (more than 25 partners) to explore and accompany the transformation of writing and reading, publishing and distribution practices in a digital context, on a critical, but above all a practical level, by working with contributors in the field to develop strategies and positions adapted to the new environment and thus support the digital transition of cultural environments. The partnership is divided into two components: a literary component, which opens into two distinct poles, the Montreal and Quebec City poles, which together cover the largest number of literary activities in Quebec; and an educational component, concerned with forms of digital literacy and the transformation of publishing, mediation and reception practices in digital children and youth literature.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 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".