MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1576441361 · doi:10.4000/ahrf.11820

Monique Cottret, Tuer le tyran? Le tyrannicide dans l’Europe moderne

2010· article· fr· W1576441361 on OpenAlexaff
Michel Biard

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales historiques de la Révolution française · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArtHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Affirmant avoir toujours été fascinée par le « on ne peut point régner innocemment » de Saint-Just, Monique Cottret entend ici proposer « l’histoire politique d’une idée, celle du tyrannicide », et non une histoire des idées politiques. « Ceux qui se réclament de Judith, ceux qui évoquent Brutus ne sont pas tout à fait les mêmes. Il y a ceux qui utilisent le poignard, ceux qui font des procès, les régicides individuels et les régicides collectifs. Beaucoup agissent au nom de Dieu, d’autres a...

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)0.002
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: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.152
Threshold uncertainty score0.302

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales historiques de la Révolution françaiseSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207