MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W591530042 · doi:10.7202/1052139ar

À propos du Chili et de l'évolution du roman. Entretien avec Roberto Gac

2015· article· fr· W591530042 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David Wallace

Bibliographic record

VenueSens public · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComparative Literary Analysis and Criticism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans le monde de la littérature, le Chili est reconnu surtout par ses poètes (Gabriela Mistral et Pablo Neruda, tous deux prix Nobel). Ses romanciers, en dehors de Roberto Bolaño, n'ont jamais atteint le même niveau de prestige. Il y a également une lignée d'écrivains d'avant-garde qui va de Vicente Huidobro dans les années 30 (son œuvre, à l'époque réputée en France et en Espagne, est en partie écrite en français), jusqu'à Jean Emar, Juan-Agustín Palazuelos et Mauricio Wacquez, pendant la deuxième moitié du 20e siècle. Dans cet entretien David Wallace, professeur de littérature à l'Université du Chili, donne, à travers ses questions, un aperçu de l'évolution de la narrative chilienne en particulier et de la narrative hispanique en générale, tout en laissant ouverte la question du roman comme genre littéraire face aux nouvelles technologies et à l'invention de l'écriture électronique.

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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.025
Threshold uncertainty score0.077

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.023
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.247
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSens publicSame topicComparative Literary Analysis and CriticismFrench-language works237,207