MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414921189

History and Narrative Semiology of Concept Albums : Examples from Québécois and French Corpora from 1968 to 1987

2025· dissertation· fr· W4414921189 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuetheses.fr (ABES) · 2025
Typedissertation
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeFrenchPerspective (graphical)VerisimilitudeLigne
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette thèse examine des albums concepts français et québécois de 1967 à 1987. Elle aborde l’album concept à la fois comme une œuvre narrative plurimédiale, dont les composants sont organisés autour d’un fil conducteur sémantique, et comme une production phonographique sur le marché musical, évoluant parfois en franchise transmédiatique. L’étude se concentre sur deux processus clés, la mise en album et la mise en marché, en analysant leurs formes, leurs objectifs et leur déploiement dans la musique française et québécoise de la période étudiée. Avec une approche narratologique, ce travail vise à identifier comment la narrativité des albums se manifeste à tous les niveaux : paroles, musique, performance vocale, ingénierie du son, images et structure de la pochette, récit promotionnel, spectacles et adaptations transmédiales. Par ailleurs, une perspective cantologique est utilisée pour caractériser l’esthétique des albums concepts français et québécois au sein de la chanson francophone et de la musique populaire occidentale en général, notamment par rapport au corpus anglophone de la même période.

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)0.001
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.267

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.008
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.261
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designQualitative
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 venuetheses.fr (ABES)Same topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207