MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405208511 · doi:10.1080/09639489.2024.2433209

Constance Debré et l’a-maternité : habiter un corps impossible

2024· article· fr· W4405208511 on OpenAlexaff
Laurence Perron

Bibliographic record

VenueModern & Contemporary France · 2024
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicHistorical and Scientific Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Trois-Rivières
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cette analyse des enjeux représentationnels consacrée à l’œuvre romanesque de Constance Debré, j’insiste d’abord sur la manière dont l’exercice du droit est présenté comme une performance qui donne forme au corps de l’avocate. À cette influence initiale du droit sur le corps, s’ajoute celle (punitive) qui suit la condamnation. La narratrice, dans Love Me Tender, est effectivement instituée en tant que mère par le discours juridique ; cependant, ce discours qui la construit en tant que figure maternelle énonce en même temps son inaptitude à remplir adéquatement ce rôle (et ce, selon des principes homophobes et hétéronormatifs). Face à cette impasse, l’écriture se présente comme un moyen de rejeter le corps maternel, celui que la justice lui impose tout en la contraignant à n’occuper cette position que dans la mesure où il lui est refusé de l’investir pleinement. À partir de cette impossibilité, je postule en conclusion que Debré construit une figure « a-maternelle » sur laquelle elle érige les principes d’une poétique qui l’affilie en dehors de sa généalogie, l’éloignant des ancêtres de sa famille bourgeoise et aristocrate, mais aussi de son fils (et de la figure de l’héritier qu’il pourrait incarner).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.076

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.036
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.042
GPT teacher head0.274
Teacher spread0.232 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern & Contemporary FranceSame topicHistorical and Scientific StudiesFrench-language works237,207