MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1580830463

La relación organismo-mecanismo: un problema de la controversia Leibniz-Stahl

2012· article· es· W1580830463 on OpenAlex
François Duchesneau

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

VenueAmericanae (AECID Library) · 2012
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilosophical Thought and Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTeleologySoulPhilosophyAutonomyEpistemologyOrganismMechanism (biology)BiologyLawPolitical scienceGenetics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The organism-mechanism relationship is at the center of the controversy between Leibniz and Stahl. Leibniz borrowed his notion of organism from Hoffmann who had established a mechanistic theory of living beings, based on the teleological disposition of complex organic structures that a system of inner forces activates. Inspired by that model, Leibniz criticizes Stahl’s conception of the soul as an agent and regulator of vital motions. He develops in contrast his views on the physiological autonomy of the organic body, governed by laws of change that parallel those ruling over of the soul’s per- ceptions and appetites.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.728
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.263 · 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