MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7084226256

FICTION ET MÉMOIRE D’UNE ROUMANIE OUBLIÉE. ENTRETIEN AVEC LILIANA LAZAR AUTOUR DU ROMAN ENFANTS DU DIABLE

2025· article· fr· W7084226256 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2025
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldMedicine
TopicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWestern europePeriod (music)Mythology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Liliana Lazar a grandi dans un village près de Iași où son père exerçait comme garde forestier. Elle a étudié la littérature française à l’Université Alexandru Ioan Cuza de Iași. Elle s’installe en France en 1996 et réside à Gap, au pied des Alpes. Auteure francophone, elle écrit en français plusieurs romans : Terre des affranchis (Gaïa 2009), Enfants du diable (Seuil, 2016), Carpates (Plon, 2024). En 2010, son roman Terre des affranchis lui vaut le Prix des cinq continents de la Francophonie parmi d’autres prix obtenus : Prix Première des auditeurs de la RTBF (2010) et Prix Littéraire Québec-France Marie-Claire-Blais (2011). Dans son deuxième roman, Enfants du diable, Liliana Lazar plonge le lecteur dans la Roumanie profonde des années 1970 – 1990, une époque où la propagande du « brillant avenir » ne parvient plus à tromper personne. Le village de Prigor, niché dans la plaine moldave, devient le théâtre d’une tragédie dictée par le destin et aggravée par la directive absurde d’un dictateur : encourager à tout prix la natalité au nom du patriotisme, quitte à condamner de nombreux enfants à l’abandon dès leur naissance.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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 score0.055
Threshold uncertainty score0.109

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.011
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.467
Teacher spread0.383 · 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)→Same topicDiabetes, Cardiovascular Risks, and Lipoproteins→French-language works237,207→