MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1489521614 · doi:10.3917/leph.061.0001

L'inquiétude de la vie facticielle.

2006· article· fr· W1489521614 on OpenAlexaff
Christian Sommer

Bibliographic record

VenueLes études philosophiques · 2006
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsLibrary and Archives Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

Dans son cours de 1921-1922, Interprétations phénoménologiques d’Aristote , le jeune Heidegger conceptualise, par le biais d’Aristote, les phénomènes archichrétiens thématisés dans son interprétation de Paul (1920-1921) et d’Augustin (1921). Cette conceptualisation phénoménologique, guidée par l’opposition luthérienne entre theologia gloriae et theologia crucis, imprime l’orientation générale à sa « destruction » d’Aristote (Physique, De anima, Éthique à Nicomaque) située sous l’horizon herméneutique de la « vie facticielle » en sa mobilité.

Stored with the screening record, where it is evidence for the labels above.

How this classification was reachedexpand

The three-model screen

all 5,600 screened works →

All three models called this out of scope.

stratum: french · design weight: 1554.47 (the sample is stratified; any rate computed without the weight is wrong)
Claude Opus 4.8OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Philosophical essay on Heidegger's reading of Aristotle; philosophy of existence, not of contemporary research practice.

GPT-5.6 (high)OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

The article is a philosophical interpretation of Heidegger and Aristotle rather than a study of research practice.

Grok 4.5OUT
genre: conceptual
about Canada: no
confidence: high

Phenomenological philosophy of Heidegger’s factical life; pure philosophy, not metaresearch.

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)0.003
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.023
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0000.003
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 head0.072
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.234 · 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
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes études philosophiquesSame topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207