Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article explore la dimension métaréflexive de l’écriture d’Annie Ernaux en examinant la façon dont l’autrice interroge l’acte d’écrire au sein même de ses oeuvres. L’analyse ne vise pas à montrer comment le texte suscite une pensée d’ordre métapoétique, mais à cerner, au sein de l’oeuvre en cours, le rôle et le fonctionnement de ces retours réflexifs. En s’appuyant sur un corpus constitué des oeuvres publiées jusqu’à Le jeune homme (2022), l’étude montre comment le texte se pense et se réfléchit de façon multiscalaire, tout d’abord dans sa visée (le texte comme projet), dans son déroulement (le texte comme processus) et dans son accomplissement (le texte comme projection). Centré sur le métadiscours qui accompagne la création, l’article montre que l’écriture d’Ernaux est à la fois une recherche et une construction en mouvement.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".