Paysage et poésies francophones
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Communication lyrique et interaction francophone une effusion sentimentale plus ou moins spontane de l'crivain, mais une vritable mise en forme des expriences sensibles.La posie lyrique invite les lecteurs un investissement affectif du texte.Mais, c'est juste- rnent cet investissement qui est en partie recadr, lorsque nous nous inscrivons dans un horizon francophone, car il influence la coopration er I'acte de comprhension.Certes, il n'existe pas une posie francophone ni un mode unique d'entrer dans les textes, mais un vaste champ littraire qui engage un foyer d'effets typiques.Or, le thme du paysage permet d'interroger ce foyer particulier des posies francophones, car il se situe au croisement des constructions de la subjectivit, de la rference au monde et de I'espace en littrature.Ainsi, l'vocation lyrique d'un paysage active de manire puissante les diffrentes instances de la situation de communication : le sujet, le destinataire, I'espace et le temps.Le paysage se fonde sur un lien d'appartenance charnelle entre le sujet et le monde, en mettant en relief certaines dispositions affectives.Il nous 1. Pou les considrations gnrales sur la posie lyrique, nous synthtisons les propos de notre
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.011 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".