MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Reflexões sobre a obra que o Sr. Hobbes publicou em inglês, sobre a liberdade, a necessidade e o acaso

2007· article· pt· W2030041592 on OpenAlexaff
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz

Bibliographic record

VenueTrans/Form/Ação · 2007
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical Thought
Canadian institutionsOpen Text (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanitiesReflexMedicineAnesthesia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

1. Desde que a questão da necessidade e da liberdade, com as que dela dependem, foi outrora suscitada pelo célebre Sr. Hobbes e Sr. Jean Bramhall, bispo de Derry, graças aos livros publicados de ambas as partes; quanto a isso, acreditei fornecer uma explicação (connaissance) diferente (distincte)(embora já o tenha mencionado mais de uma vez), tanto mais que estes escritos do Sr. Hobbes até o momento não apareceram senão em inglês e o que vem deste autor geralmente contém algo de bom e de engenhoso

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.028
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.057
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.236 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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 venueTrans/Form/AçãoSame topicSeventeenth-Century Political and Philosophical ThoughtFrench-language works237,207