MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1977868815 · doi:10.7202/005002ar

Comprendre la superstition

2002· article· fr· W1977868815 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Claude Breton

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSuperstitionHumanitiesPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La superstition a acquis une nouvelle signification dans le mondeinterreligieux dans lequel nous vivons, un monde qui est passablementdifférent de celui de l’ère chrétienne homogène. Elle est aussi étudiée demanière différente. Plutôt que d’être représentée seulement comme une voiereligieuse déviante, elle est comprise de plus en plus comme un monde desens que la science, pas plus que la religion, ne peut atteindre par elle-même.Cette approche positive de la superstition n’est pas sans poser de nouvellesquestions, l’une étant la difficulté de faire cohabiter sympathie, ouverture etapproche critique. Ce bref article essaie de présenter un survol de lasituation présente.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.709
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.244
Teacher spread0.191 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThéologiquesSame topicReligious Studies and Spiritual PracticesFrench-language works237,207