Bibliographic record
Abstract
Michel Onfray est-il la nouvelle victime de Charlotte Corday?Depuis la fin du XVIII e siècle, la liste de ceux dont l'« ange de l'assassinat » a fait perdre la tête ne cesse de s'allonger.S'il existe bien un retour de flamme pour Corday, gratifiée d'une section dans l'exposition « Crime et châtiment » au musée d'Orsay (16 mars -27 juin 2010), le coming out d'Onfray ne peut que surprendre et inquiéter, surtout lorsque celui-ci reçoit la bénédiction de la critique la plus installée (Jérôme Garcin, « Michel Onfray : pour Charlotte », Le Nouvel Observateur, 5 mars 2009).Car cet éloge est un brûlot mal inspiré, jamais fondé, truffé d'erreurs, ponctué d'attaques haineuses, arbitraires et pour tout dire, populistes.L'ouvrage a le mérite d'être engagé.Onfray entend montrer que Charlotte Corday doit inspirer tous ceux qui, lassés d'une gauche de ressentiment, impuissante et rongée par les haines et les envies, demeurent fidèles à l'action, à la morale et à la vertu, trilogie qu'Onfray résume en reprenant une expression de Michelet : la « religion du poignard ».
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.016 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".