MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000689829 · doi:10.7202/018177ar

L’intelligence : « dans » ou « devant » le monde ?

2008· article· fr· W2000689829 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Daniel Moreau

Bibliographic record

VenueLaval théologique et philosophique · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldPsychology
TopicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in Psychology
Canadian institutionsCegep de Sainte Foy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyIntuitionEthnologyEpistemologySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Présent depuis les origines de la pensée occidentale, le questionnement sur la nature et les capacités de l’intelligence humaine dans son rapport au monde est toujours très riche aujourd’hui. Vladimir Jankélévitch, inspiré par Bergson, pose un diagnostic critique sur l’intelligence tout en développant la notion d’intuition. Nous comparons cette analyse à celle d’Aristote, en particulier dans le De Anima, telle que relue par des penseurs contemporains, afin d’en dégager ce qui pourrait éclairer nos débats actuels.

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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

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 studies0.0040.024
Scholarly communication0.0090.007
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.366
Teacher spread0.275 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaval théologique et philosophiqueSame topicAcademic and Historical Perspectives in PsychologyFrench-language works237,207