Bibliographic record
Abstract
Ce travail s’appuie sur les propositions respectives de Bion et de Kaës soulignant les relations étroites dans la psyché du mythe et du rêve. Bion conçoit que les mythes et les rêves s’originent d’un même temps inaugural de croissance de la pensée dans l’évolution psychique. Quant à René Kaës, il a récemment théorisé l’idée d’espaces oniriques interpsychiques communs et partagés et l’existence de trois ombilics du rêve. Mon investigation de l’usage intensif des rêves dans le mythe de l’épopée de Gilgamesh soulignera la pertinence de ces perspectives. Il s’y révèle en effet l’intrication de la construction du mythe avec les rêves au sein de l’évolution psychique, ainsi que l’importance du caractère relationnel du rêve qui, articulé aux représentations culturelles et sociales va fonder le mycélium d’un troisième ombilic, obscur noyau de l’émergence du récit mythique. Un exemple clinique évoquera combien malgré l’impossibilité d’un patient d’accéder à ses racines culturelles spécifiques, de possibles aspects de ce troisième ombilic se manifestent pour lui de manière énigmatique, dans son activité onirique.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 0.003 |
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".