MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7127585329 · doi:10.3917/rhlf.072.0469b

Savoirs de Proust , sous la direction de MICHEL PIERSSENS, FRANC SCHUEREWAGEN, ANA GONZALES SALVADOR. Paragraphes , Département d’études françaises, université de Montréal, 2005. Un vol. de 220 p.

2007· article· fr· W7127585329 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Annick Bouillaguet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire littéraire de la France · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Literature and Critical Theory
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPower (physics)Context (archaeology)Identity (music)Field (mathematics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Le monastère de Port-Royal est évoqué avec une régularité et une insistance surprenantes dans le roman français de 1657 à 2006. L’enquête recense la façon dont il figure dans les textes, à titre de référence purement occasionnelle ou de sujet, par le biais de descriptions spontanées ou d’évocations livresques, qui ramènent alors toutes au Port-Royal de Sainte-Beuve. L’étude de l’image que le genre romanesque donne du monastère permet ensuite de repérer certaines constantes (Port-Royal des Champs, quelques Solitaires, le motif du jardin d’Eden). Elles dénotent un parti pris d’idéalisation et une étroite imbrication, chez les auteurs concernés, du motif constitué par Port-Royal avec la notion d’un classicisme français. L’analyse de l’usage narratif qui est fait de Port-Royal révèle néanmoins que le monastère autorise d’abord, de Mlle de Scudéry à Lydie Salvayre, une méditation religieuse et morale, s’il apparaît aussi que les romans qui mentionnent Port-Royal présentent tous une exigence de vérité particulière, souvent inscrite dans le recours aux formes de la confession, de la lettre ou du récit historique, trahissant, en dernière instance, une influence rhétorique de la réflexion menée à Port-Royal sur la fiction.

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)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.144

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0050.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0280.011

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.

Opus teacher head0.006
GPT teacher head0.192
Teacher spread0.187 · 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
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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractno

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire littéraire de la FranceSame topicFrench Literature and Critical TheoryFrench-language works237,207