Bibliographic record
Abstract
À partir de son expérience de lecteur d'ouvrages de science-fiction (SF), l'A.montre que cette littérature aborde souvent des sujets à connotations religieuses : les questions de la vie après la mort et de l'au-delà, de l'éthique et de la conscience, du rapport à la divinité, etc. C 'est ainsi que la SF constitue un « laboratoire de sens » social et religieux qui étudie les conséquences de l'évolution scientifique et philosophique.L'article propose un cadre de travail pour l'étude des questions religieuses et théologiques dans la littérature de la SF.ABSTRACT : Referring to his experiences as a reader of science fiction, the author shows that this type of literature often deals with subjects of a religious nature : questions of life after death and of the beyond, of ethics and conscience and of our relationship to the divine, etc.In this way, sci-fi serves as a real "laboratory of social and religious meaning" which studies the consequences of the evolution of the sciences and philosophy.The article sets forth a framework for the study of religious and theological questions in the literature of science fiction.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".