MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1780065020 · doi:10.3968/5701

Analysis of Kant's "Practical Rational Criticism"

2014· article· en· W1780065020 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Niansi Yang

Bibliographic record

VenueHigher education of social science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicFlannery O'Connor and Thomas Merton
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKindnessPremiseCriticismEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychologySociologyLawPolitical scienceTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Kant’s “Practical rational criticism” established the people’s behavior that should be “absolute command”, and highlighted the basic way of human to the kindness. Kant’s research result has a realistic significance: practice is rational; people’s practice is free. But this freedom is based on the premise of moral law; the goal of practical rational goal is to reach the kindness level.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.026
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0050.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHigher education of social scienceSame topicFlannery O'Connor and Thomas MertonFrench-language works237,207