MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4253854477 · doi:10.1093/obo/9780195399301-0428

Academies

2019· reference-entry· en· W4253854477 sur OpenAlexvenueno aff
Simone Testa

Notice bibliographique

RevueRenaissance and Reformation · 2019
Typereference-entry
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueHistorical Influence and Diplomacy
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésEmblemHumanismPoliticsPeriod (music)RhetoricSpace (punctuation)Spare timeSociologyHistoryHumanitiesMedia studiesLawArtVisual artsPolitical scienceAestheticsPhilosophy

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Academies were one of the most influential social and cultural phenomena of the early modern period. The fashion of creating academies started in Italy in the early 15th century and spread to the rest of Europe. While it initially referred to a place, “Academia” or “Accademia” came to indicate many kinds of formal or informal groups, the gathering of such groups, or the activities they promoted. “Accademia” as a form of spontaneous association of learned individuals, separated from universities or from religious groups, was used by circles of humanists in early Quattrocento Tuscany, and spread to the rest of the Italian peninsula, to the point that between 1430 and 1700, there were hundreds of academies, in big cities as well as in small centers. They engaged in all sorts of disciplines, such as history, geography, poetry, music, theater, rhetoric, politics, diplomacy, medicine, mathematics, physics, engineering, etc., and generally promoted knowledge as a collaborative effort. “Accademia” defined a social space where a group of people gathered to share their spare time, information, and knowledge, initially without necessarily drafting membership rules or statutes. As they constituted forms of learned sociability, academies varied greatly through space and time, and interests, and (at least in Italy) they tended to be short-lived. Many academies in Italy acquired playful names, such as Oziosi (The Idle Ones), Intrepidi (The Intrepid Ones), Abbandonati (The Abandoned Ones), and Gelati (The Frozen Ones), and they often adopted an emblem, or impresa; that is, a picture with a motto. Several academies were the creation of young men in their late teens and early twenties. Many required their members to adopt playful names related to the general name of the academy and its impresa. Many selected a patron saint and asked for the protection of a living patron, generally a member of the clergy or the nobility. Different from other associations, such as confraternities or guilds, many academies facilitated the diffusion of their activities in the form of networked publications. Academies proudly declared on their publications, either in manuscript or in print, the name of the academy and the names of academicians. In this way, academies facilitated the importance of belonging across intellectual circles, which made them more famous than other kinds of groups. By the end of the 16th century, it was impossible for any learned man living on the Italian peninsula to ignore the social space of the “accademia.” Later on, the model of Italian academies influenced the creation of similar groups in other European countries, such as France, Germany, Belgium, Spain, and England. In general, however, transalpine academies tended to be more long-lasting, more structured, dependent on political power, and keener to produce collaborative research that met with the celebration of the utility of knowledge promoted by the cultural goals of the late 17th and 18th centuries. In general, the representation of Italian academies through the centuries met both good and bad judgments. Lately, the phenomenon is being reevaluated in light of current forms of social networks. It is the intention of this contribution to include all gatherings that gave themselves the name of “academy,” whether or not they drafted rules and regulations, published books, used the vernacular Italian language in their publications, or gave themselves and their members humorous names.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,620
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,658

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0010,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,001

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,038
Tête enseignante GPT0,329
Écart entre enseignants0,292 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations1
Publié2019
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueRenaissance and ReformationMême sujetHistorical Influence and DiplomacyTravaux en français237 207