La verve Rabelaisienne dans un corpus de romans Qu?becois et Antillais contemporains
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis investigates a corpus of contemporary Quebec and French West Indian\nnovels using a mainly formal approach, based on the concepts of stylistics as a deviation\nfrom the norm, and to a lesser extent, of magical realism. Both of these - along with\nreference to additional tools such as literary play - combine to shape our concept of\n'Rabelaisian Verve'. The idea stems from the fact that much contemporary Quebec and\nFrench West Indian prose fiction displays exuberance of language and imagination,\nwhich are to be found in Rabelais' own oeuvre. Therefore, a seemingly heterogeneous\ncorpus conceals substantial analogies. These stem, amongst others, from the shared\norigins of the first settlers, distance from the normative pressure of France and a\nmultilingual context. Even though the Renaissance writer has been the subject of\nnumerous analyses, none of these could be sourced to the French expression\n'Rabelaisian verve'. This thesis represents an attempt to address this gap.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".