MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977439349 · doi:10.3917/rphi.101.0097

Berkeley et l'imagination

2010· article· fr· W1977439349 on OpenAlexaff
Sébastien Charles

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue philosophique de la France et de l étranger · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRepriseOpposition (politics)PhilosophyHumanitiesPolitical sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé La place qu’occupe l’imagination dans la philosophie berkeleyenne semble ne pas poser de problème et n’être en rien originale, consistant en une simple reprise de la position lockéenne. Pourtant, en attribuant une spontanéité créatrice à l’imagination, qui en fait une faculté tout à fait particulière, et en insistant sur la puissance et les limites de cette même faculté, Berkeley réintroduit subrepticement un principe de différenciation au plan épistémologique, que l’on peut retrouver mutatis mutandis au plan moral à travers son opposition à la libre pensée.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.025
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue philosophique de la France et de l étrangerSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207