MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2027193209 · doi:10.7202/011818ar

Quelques remarques sur la réception d’un pseudépigraphe : les Oracles Chaldaïques

2005· article· fr· W2027193209 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Serge Cazelais

Bibliographic record

VenueLaval théologique et philosophique · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article propose une hypothèse au sujet des Oracles Chaldaïques en les abordant sous l’angle de l’histoire de leur réception. L’objectif de l’A. est de replacer l’origine de ces oracles dans le contexte immédiat de la spiritualité néoplatonicienne. L’hypothèse proposée est illustrée par quelques vers de Proclus qui nous sont rapportés par son disciple Marinus dans son traité Proclus ou sur le bonheur ainsi que par quelques témoignages littéraires sur la conception de la prière chez les néoplatoniciens. L’article se termine sur un exemple de réception moderne des Oracles Chaldaïques .

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.602
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.226 · 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 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
Published2005
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaval théologique et philosophiqueSame topicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesFrench-language works237,207