Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les nombreuses éditions modernes de L’Utopie de Thomas More présentent un visage très différent des premières éditions publiées au début du xvie siècle. On note, par exemple, que la plus grande partie de ce qu’on appelle les parerga – lettres d’humanistes, poèmes et gravures qui encadrent les éditions renaissantes –, a été presque systématiquement éliminée. Il en va de même pour les 194 notes marginales, attribuées à Érasme ou à Pierre Gilles. Ces coupures et reconfigurations des éditions originales paraissent extrêmement significatives : elles nous semblent étroitement liées à une lecture de L’Utopie qui paraît déformée par notre conception moderne du livre et de l’auteur. Une analyse attentive des quatre premières éditions nous permettra de mettre en lumière la structure textuelle et éditoriale beaucoup plus sophistiquée de cette oeuvre humaniste foncièrement « dialogocentrique », ce qui pourrait transformer radicalement notre lecture de ce livre utopique à plus d’un titre.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.027 | 0.004 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".