Quand Doré illustre les contes de Perrault, enjeux narratifs de la pagination
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’ouvrage luxueux que réalisent Hetzel et Doré en 1861 se distingue d’abord par la qualité graphique et technique des images, des planches pleine page de grand format. Mais il se singularise aussi du lot des éditions illustrées par le nombre important de planches (quarante pour soixante pages de texte) et la liberté laissée à l’artiste de ne représenter que les scènes qui l’inspirent, ce qui aboutit à une grande irrégularité des passages illustrés. Du fait des contraintes éditoriales de pagination, et notamment la volonté de répartir de manière plus régulière les illustrations dans l’ouvrage, la plupart des images se retrouvent éloignées des passages textuels représentés. Nous montrerons, à travers deux cas particuliers, que cela fait perdre aux illustrations de Doré une part de leur puissance narrative.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.003 |
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".