Le Roman de la rose: représentations allégoriques et transformations iconographiques du manuscrit à l'imprimé
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This Master's thesis is divided in two parts, a research section followed by a creative writing piece. In the first part, we are studying the iconographical transformation of the late manuscripts and first printed books of Le Roman de la Rose, written in the XIIIe century by Guillaume de Lorris and Jean de Meun. It will mainly be demonstrated how the relation between text and image have changed from the manuscript Douce 195 to the printed book Rosenwald 396, although they were both made during the second part of the XVe century. The second section presents an illustrated tale where two young adults, Noé and Rameau, are leaving their village without consulting each other and with no intention of meeting ever again. But their paths cross once more in a very strange place, a field of blue toilets, and both of their lives will be changed by this coincidence. The link between the two parts of this Master's thesis is the attention given to the relation between text and picture in the interpretative process of a literary piece.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.002 |
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.
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".