MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2015056249 · doi:10.7202/024962ar

Heureux comme Dieu en exégèse?

2007· article· fr· W2015056249 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Olivette Genest

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2007
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Occupée d'écrits que Dieu remplit marge-à-marge, Pexégèse biblique parle-t-elle forcément de lui? L'ambiguïté factuelle de la réponse suscite cette question insolite. L'auteure distingue entre omniprésence, absence et présence de Dieu en exégèse; entre Dieu de la Bible, Dieu de l'exégèse et Dieu familier des croyants; entre exégèse et grâce. Elle souhaite un rajustement de la démarche exégétique qui, par-delà son impressionnante activité heuristique, revienne à la respiration du texte et lui laisse le soin de parler de Dieu, si et quand l'acte de lecture le requiert. Cependant, le Dieu de la Bible, éclairé par le Dieu de l'exégèse, peut-il entrer de plain-pied dans notre époque et pouvons-nous, sans plus, le rejoindre sans quitter la nôtre? Il appartient aussi à l'exégèse d'oeuvrer ici au service de la lecture.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.846
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.229 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThéologiquesSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207