MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983959720 · doi:10.4000/crm.11706

Entre encyclopédie et récit

2009· article· fr· W1983959720 on OpenAlexaff
Madeleine Jeay

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers de recherches médiévales · 2009
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Literary Studies
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMetaphorAnalogyPoetryPhilosophyMusicalHarmony (color)LiteratureReflexive pronounInterpretation (philosophy)HumanitiesArtEpistemologyLinguisticsVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The fact the Livre des Échecs amoureux cannot be reduced to a specific genre, can be explained by Evrart de Conty’s intention to compose a poetic work. His text can be considered as a microcosm that encompasses encyclopedic knowledge, philosophic, mythographic, and literary traditions. The analogy with the macrocosm is based on the musical harmony ruling over all aspects of creation. The musical metaphor is central for the interpretation of a work composed by an author who sees himself as a poet as well as a commentator.

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)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.038
Threshold uncertainty score0.126

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0030.009
Scholarly communication0.0210.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0380.009

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.337
Teacher spread0.269 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers de recherches médiévalesSame topicHistorical and Literary StudiesFrench-language works237,207