MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W140028887 · doi:10.3138/cjh.38.2.199

Soi et l’Autre dans la perspective de l’antagonisme «barbarie-civilisation»: le cas de la Bulgarie et de ses voisins balkaniques

2003· article· fr· W140028887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Boriana Panayotova

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of History · 2003
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural Identity and Heritage
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtCivilizationPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article s’inscrit dans le cadre de la problématique de la perception de Soi et de l’Autre. Il tente de cerner la place de la dichotomie « barbarie-civilisation » dans la construction de l’image que les Bulgares se donnent et celle qu’ils confèrent à leurs voisins. Les Bulgares organisent leur narration nationale autour de l’axe conceptuel « barbarie-civilisation », lequel qui outrepasse dès lors sa fonction initiale, à savoir incarner l’opposition Orient versus Occident, Europe versus Empire ottoman, pour se muer en critère principal de la perception de Soi et de l’Autre. Le déplacement de la Bulgarie de l’extrémité gauche vers l’extrémité droite de l’axe « barbarie-civilisation » sert de fil conducteur à la trame historique. Le texte étale les jalons qui structurent la mutation des Bulgares, d’anciens « barbares » en nouveaux « civilisés ». Toutefois, parallèlement au processus d’appropriation de la « civilisation », se déroule aussi celui de sa négation. « Civilisé » devient ainsi synonyme de décadence, de mollesse et d’immoralité, ce qui conduit à la faiblesse, à la vieillesse et à la mort. Toute la narration historique s’imprègne de ce mélange de fascination et de méfiance envers la « civilisation ». Cette hésitation constante trouve néanmoins sa résolution finale dans un éloge de la « civilisation ».

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.195
Threshold uncertainty score0.388

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.021
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of HistorySame topicCultural Identity and HeritageFrench-language works237,207