Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'oeuvre de Karl Barth continue d'inspirer de nombreux chercheurs en théologie et en sciences religieuses. Si personne n'a jamais remis en doute la profonde érudition de Barth, on s'aperçoit à la lecture de la Kirchliche Dogmatik que le théologien protestant ne ménage pas les religions. On trouve par exemple dans cette oeuvre quelques pages particulièrement sévères à propos la religion islamique et notamment de sa doctrine de l'unicité divine. C'est parce que l'islam, de par sa visibilité croissante, est devenu un acteur incontournable du dialogue interreligieux à construire qu'il a semblé nécessaire de passer les propos de Barth à l'épreuve d'une certaine déconstruction philosophique. On espère ainsi contribuer à une théologie des religions assez critique de ses sources pour ne point exclure sur des critères doctrinaux la contribution des différentes fois au dialogue interreligieux.
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 | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".