Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article est une réaction à la contribution de Geneviève Médevielle qui porte sur la foi à l’oeuvre dans l’accueil des étrangers dans l’Église de France. Ce thème est abordé sous l’angle de l’éthique. N’étant pas moi-même éthicien, j’appuie mon commentaire sur une lecture longitudinale du texte, relevant au passage ce qui m’éclaire et m’enthousiasme, mais aussi ce qui soulève en moi des points d’interrogation. Ainsi, je remarque, entre autres choses, que les trois modèles d’éthique (éthique autonome, éthique de la foi, éthique communautarienne de la vertu) justifiant l’attitude des chrétiens qui entrent dans l’illégalité pour défendre des étrangers sans droits, ne devraient pas être présentés de façon diachronique. Il ne s’agit pas de positions concurrentes qui se suivent en se supprimant. Il faudrait plutôt les saisir comme des possibilités concomitantes et contemporaines.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
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.
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".