MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1807731505 · doi:10.3917/rspt.922.0209

Comment pratiquer la théologie trinitaire en pèlerin ?

2008· article· fr· W1807731505 on OpenAlexaff
Emmanuel Durand

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Philosophy and Theology
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Afin de qualifier la théologie trinitaire comme une théologie de pèlerins, on doit s’interroger sur le rapport entre l’exercice de la théologie trinitaire et la béatitude eschatologique. Mais il convient d’abord de clarifier la corrélation objective entre la béatitude divine et le mystère trinitaire. Se pose alors la question suivante : comment interpréter, dans la Somme de théologie, l’enchaînement inaperçu entre la dernière question du traité sur l’essence de Dieu, consacrée à la béatitude divine, et la première question sur la Trinité, consacrée aux deux processions trinitaires ? Afin de négocier au mieux ce délicat passage, il faut analyser le différend épistémologique entre Thomas d’Aquin et Richard de Saint-Victor à propos du statut des « raisons » en théologie trinitaire.

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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.835
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.025
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.338
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.028 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue des sciences philosophiques et théologiquesSame topicMedieval Philosophy and TheologyFrench-language works237,207