Writing Beyond the End Times? / Écrire au-delà de la fin des temps ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collection of essays examines how the sense of crisis that occasionally seems to overwhelm us directs and transforms Canadian and Quebec writings in English and French, and conversely, how literature and criticism set out to counterbalance the social, economic, and ideological insecurities we live in. Ce recueil de textes étudie les manières dont le sentiment de crise qui peut parfois sembler nous submerger, oriente et transforme les écrits canadiens et québécois d’expressions anglaise et française, et inversement, comment la littérature et la critique s’efforcent de contrebalancer les insécurités sociales, économiques et idéologiques dans lesquelles nous vivons. Contributors: David Boucher, Marie Carrière, Nicole Côté, Piet Defraeye, Nicoletta Dolce, Danielle Dumontet, Ana María Fraile-Marcos, Marion Kühn, Hans-Jürgen Lüsebrink, Carmen Mata Barreiro, Ursula Mathis-Moser, Dunja M. Mohr, Émilie Notard, Daniel Poitras, Véronique Porra, Srilata Ravi, Marion Christina Rohrleitner
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.025 | 0.025 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.004 |
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".