Pas de statue pour Hubertine : quand notre mémoire d’une pionnière du suffragisme fait des vagues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: En 1914, la disparition d’Hubertine Auclert, qui avait voué sa vie au combat féministe, provoque une grande émotion. On envisage de lui ériger une statue, mais ce projet ne se concrétisera pas. C’est autour de lieux de mémoire plus confidentiels que son souvenir est préservé. Nous avons identifié trois moments, chacun associé à des lieux différents. Jusqu’en 1930, la tombe de la suffragiste s’impose comme un lieu de pèlerinage féministe. Les années suivantes offrent l’apparence d’un creux de la vague mémoriel, mais c’est alors que la militante Marie-Louise Bouglé recueille dans sa bibliothèque les archives d’Auclert, les préservant de la destruction. Cependant, si dans le sillage de la deuxième vague du féminisme Auclert gagne une certaine reconnaissance, le Panthéon lui reste fermé. En cela, elle est emblématique des femmes, et plus encore des féministes, qui occupent une place seconde dans la mémoire nationale française. Abstract: In 1914, the death of Hubertine Auclert, who had dedicated her life to the feminist cause, stirred great emotion. The idea of erecting a statue in her honour was considered, but never materialized. Auclert’s memory is thus preserved in more confidential sites of remembrance. We have identified three moments, each associated with a different place. Until 1930, the suffragist’s tomb was a place of feminist pilgrimage. The following years appear to have been a low point in the history of her memory, but it was then that activist Marie-Louise Bouglé collected Auclert’s archives for safekeeping in her library, preserving them from destruction. However, while Auclert gained a degree of recognition in the wake of the second wave of feminism, the Panthéon remains closed to her. In this respect, she is emblematic of women, and even more so of feminists, who occupy a place of secondary importance in France’s national memory.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".