MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4410217860 · doi:10.5206/mf.v10i2.22965

Une analyse de post-mémoire en Marguerite : le feu

2025· article· fr· W4410217860 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jadyn Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueMouvances Francophones · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMoiré patternPhysicsArtOptics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans Marguerite : le feu, Émilie Monnet suit trois interprètes noires et autochtones–Aïcha, Émilie et Madeline–pendant qu’elles racontent la vie de Marguerite Duplessis. Duplessis était une esclave autochtone arrêtée en 1740 en Nouvelle-France pour libertinage et vol. Elle a contesté sa condamnation à la déportation vers les Antilles, mais a disparu. On ne sait pas ce qui s’est passé après qu’elle a été déportée. En utilisant les motifs volcaniques, les interprètes explorent l’histoire de Duplessis comme un exemple de la destruction causée par la violence coloniale et un type de résistance par la récupération par les survivants et leurs descendants. Cette dissertation analyse la pièce en utilisant le concept de post-mémoire développée par Marianne Hirsch. En analysant l’œuvre comme création artistique et comme lieu de mémoire, je propose de démontrer que Marguerite : le feu constitue une incarnation théâtrale de la dualité post-mémoire comme une force destructive en même temps que de la résistance. Marianne Hirsch définit la post-mémoire comme un mode de souvenir par lequel les générations suivantes héritent et témoignent du traumatisme personnel, collectif et culturel des générations précédentes à travers des comportements, des photographies, des récits et des objets.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.223
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMouvances FrancophonesSame topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207