MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1973116533 · doi:10.4000/ahrf.2923

Le conflit des libertés. Thomas Paine et le débat sur la déclaration et la constitution de l'an III

2002· article· fr· W1973116533 on OpenAlexaff
Yannick Bosc

Bibliographic record

VenueAnnales historiques de la Révolution française · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesConstitutionPhilosophyConventionPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre étude analyse le débat sur la Déclaration et la Constitution de l'été 1795, à partir de la critique formulée par Thomas Paine dans son discours à la Convention le 19 messidor an III. Cette critique dénonce un projet de Constitution « rétrograde des véritables principes de liberté ». Nous décrivons le contenu et les justifications du projet de Constitution présenté par la Commission des onze ainsi que le débat auquel il donne lieu à l'Assemblée en les confrontant à la conception politiq...

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.016
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0040.006
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.222 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnnales historiques de la Révolution françaiseSame topicEuropean Political History AnalysisFrench-language works237,207