MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983628285 · doi:10.7202/1006780ar

Légitimité de l’apostolat de l’édition : Le Lévrier et Fides

2011· article· fr· W1983628285 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Yvan Cloutier

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes d histoire religieuse · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLiterature and Culture Studies
Canadian institutionsCégep de SherbrookeUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFidesHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’étude de l’activité éditoriale des congrégations religieuses québécoises permet d’identifier une logique propre à ses éditeurs, voire un modèle éditorial spécifique. L’incursion de quelques communautés dans l’édition générale, et en particulier dans l’édition littéraire, pose un problème de légitimité. Le présent article compare la production de deux éditeurs québécois, les Éditions du Lévrier, maison dominicaine, et les Éditions Fides, propriété de la Congrégation de Sainte-Croix. Le choix des titres et des auteurs reflète la compréhension que ces communautés ont de leur mission respective.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.839
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.227
Teacher spread0.197 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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
Published2011
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes d histoire religieuseSame topicLiterature and Culture StudiesFrench-language works237,207