MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1993073293 · doi:10.4000/rgi.1002

Les Incas sont-ils un peuple bon à penser ? Moïse, Platon, Rome et l’exotique apprivoisé

2004· article· fr· W1993073293 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Carmen Bernand

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue germanique internationale · 2004
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte traite de trois formes de transfert. La première est politique et correspond aux idées sur la « translatio imperii » courantes au début du xvie siècle. La puissance du Saint-Empire Romain germanique se trouve désormais incarnée dans l’Espagne des Habsbourg, mais selon des attentes messianiques cette légitimité peut se déplacer dans le Nouveau Monde, notamment au Pérou. La deuxième forme de transfert est culturelle et se concrétise par une double traduction : celle que l’Inca Garcilaso, un métis Péruvien, fait des Dialoghi d’Amore, essai écrit par Léon Hébreu, inspiré à la fois par le néoplatonisme de la renaissance et la tradition juive, et celle que ce même Gardilaso fera plus tard, en rédigeant l’histoire des Incas et en « traduisant » l’altérité absolue de ce peuple en termes platoniciens, romains et bibliques. Enfin ce travail est rendu possible par un transfert psychologique que Garcilaso, métis mélancolique entre deux mondes, opère sur Léon, le juif errant.

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), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.963
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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.047
GPT teacher head0.269
Teacher spread0.222 · 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 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
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue germanique internationaleSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207