MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Questions de filiation dans La Ballade d’Ali Baba (2014) de Catherine Mavrikakis

2020· article· fr· W7119810140 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Doris Eibl

Bibliographic record

VenueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas) · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeVernacularAdorationScapegoatSelf representation

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Non pas roman à proprement parler mais « composition » d’épisodes vécus ou inventés, de souvenirs restitués ou construits à partir de photos ou d’objets, de mélanges de faits et de fictions, La ballade d’Ali Baba de Catherine Mavrikakis correspond à maints égards à ce « récit de l’autre – le père, la mère ou tel aïeul – » dont Dominique Viart nous fait observer, dans La littérature française au présent, qu’il serait « le détour nécessaire pour parvenir à soi » (VIART, 2008, p. 81). Cette contribution se propose de prendre la mesure de l’héritage paternel – désirs, projets, échecs et frustrations (VIART, 2008, p. 81) – de cette « histoire » de filiation de l’extrême contemporain et d’en analyser les stratégies narratives ainsi que les métaphores qui la relie à un imaginaire proprement (nord-)américain. Le nomadisme revendiqué par le père y fixe le cap et le merveilleux y est toujours à portée de main, notamment lorsque la narratrice Érina est « visitée » par le spectre de son père qui lui demande de déterrer ses cendres déposées au cimetière de Montréal : « [...] elle [la mère] m’a mis au cimetière, là-haut sur la montagne, contre ma volonté. [...] Mais je suis fondamentalement nomade. » (MAVRIKAKIS, 2014, p. 103)

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0140.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.004
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.234
Teacher spread0.214 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLA Referencia (Red Federada de Repositorios Institucionales de Publicaciones Científicas)Same topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207