MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7055358964

“COMMENT PEUT-ON ÊTRE PERSAN ?”: PERSANITÉ IN CONTEMPORARY FRANCOPHONE AUTOFICTION

2024· article· en· W7055358964 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCivil War Book Review · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicParticle accelerators and beam dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrenchDiasporaIntertextualityPower (physics)StorytellingOralityTransformative learningPrism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

My research is centered on the exploration of intertextuality in Francophone literatures and cultures spanning centuries—from Canada to Iran—viewed through the prism of migration and Diaspora Studies, Postcolonial Studies, Trauma Studies, Gender Studies, and Nationalism. My doctoral dissertation, titled “‘Comment peut-on être persan?’ : Persanité in Contemporary Francophone Autofiction,” explores the intertextual echoes of Baron de Montesquieu found in the works of two Franco-Iranian authors and one Quebecois author. Within my dissertation, I have examined three contemporary autofictions: Chahdortt Djavann’s Comment peut-on être français? (2007), Lise Gauvin’s Lettres d’une autre (1984), and Maryam Madjidi’s Marx et la poupée (2017). These works are scrutinized at the confluence of literature, history, Gender Studies, and political science, where the act of writing transforms into a powerful medium capable of instigating change. Furthermore, by juxtaposing storytelling and history, my research endeavors to reclaim the concept of “imagined community” as posited by Benedict Anderson, championing the profound influence of literature—especially autofictions originating from minor and marginalized groups. This research advocates for the transformative power of literature emanating from the autofiction genre and its capacity to illuminate the experiences and identities of underrepresented communities.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.749
Threshold uncertainty score0.732

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.269
Teacher spread0.242 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCivil War Book ReviewSame topicParticle accelerators and beam dynamicsFrench-language works237,207