MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1249478476 · doi:10.4000/pallas.13428

Appréhender les Phéniciens en Sicile. Pour une relecture de l’« Archéologie sicilienne » de Thucydide (VI, 1, 1‑2)

2009· article· fr· W1249478476 on OpenAlex
Corinne Bonnet

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenuePallas · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsCanadian Heritage
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Quelle valeur historique peut-on attribuer à l’« Archéologie de la Sicile » qui inaugure le livre VI de Thucydide, notamment quant aux circonstances et aux modalités de l’arrivée des Phéniciens en Sicile ? Pour répondre à cette question, on s’efforce de comprendre la logique profonde du texte et de comprendre les cadres mentaux, ainsi que le contexte politique qui l’ont inspiré. Le témoignage de Thucydide met en scène une « mémoire coloniale » qui met en scène les premiers temps de la présence phénicienne en Sicile et propose un modèle de cohabitation hiérarchisé au sein duquel les Grecs apparaissent comme l’aboutissement naturel du processus de colonisation. Au cœur du discours de Thucydide se trouvent les faits du présent, à savoir le destin d’Athènes et son empire, la tragique expédition de Sicile, les questions de leadership au sein de la cité dans l’ère post-péricléenne. Son analyse a pour objectif de mettre au point un instrument intellectuel utile à la gestion de l’action politique.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.623
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.334
Teacher spread0.257 · 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