Littérature et histoire au XVII e siècle , sous la direction de GÉRARD FERREYROLLES. Dalhousie French Studies , Winter 2003, vol. 65. Un vol. de 153 p.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Un halo de légende entourait les dîners hebdomadaires de la Société-du-Bout-du-Banc et ses publications. Mme de Graffigny le dissipe. En 1743-1745, elle nous fait suivre presque au jour le jour, au fil de ses lettres savoureuses, l’élaboration du Recueil de ces Messieurs auquel elle participe. On saisit les mécanismes du fonctionnement de cet atelier littéraire organisé et dirigé par Mlle Quinault et le comte de Caylus. On impose à chacun un sujet, un certain style, des contrôles au cours du travail, éventuellement des corrections, une lecture devant un aréopage qui peut refuser le manuscrit. Quelle que soit leur notoriété, les membres de l’équipe acceptent ces contraintes avec bonne humeur. La rigueur n’exclut d’ailleurs pas la facétie : on en jugera par la Table des matières, l’Avertissement et la Postface de Duclos.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.010 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".