MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1990410327 · doi:10.7443/problemata.v2i2.10857

ESQUEMATISMO, HORIZONTE E TRANSCENDENCIA: Kant e Heidegger

2011· article· es· W1990410327 on OpenAlexaff
Sônia Regina Giancoli Barreto

Bibliographic record

VenueProblemata · 2011
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy and Historical Thought
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

O artigo propõe a reconstrução de alguns passos da\ninterpretação heideggeriana da Doutrina do Esquematismo de\nKant, destacando os conceitos de horizonte e transcendência,\nenquanto condição da função prévia do tempo no esquema\nkantiano dos conceitos e da temporalidade (Zeitlichkeit), nos\nesquemas das ekstases na ontologia fundamental de Sein und\nZeit. O aporte teórico segue, no primeiro passo, a\ninterpretação fenomenológica da Crítica da razão pura,\nempreendida por Heidegger e no segundo passo, visa alcançar\numa interpretação semântica do esquema dos existenciais em\nSer e tempo, à luz da interpretação semântica da filosofia\ntranscendental, empreendida por Loparic.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.024
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.130 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueProblemataSame topicPhilosophy and Historical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207