MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2043888607 · doi:10.7202/045337ar

La vérité chez Protagoras

2011· article· fr· W2043888607 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Héloïse Moysan-Lapointe

Bibliographic record

VenueLaval théologique et philosophique · 2011
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Sherbrooke
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article propose une interprétation pragmatiste des fragments de Protagoras autour de la question de la vérité. Dans un premier temps, on examinera comment la théorie de l’homme mesure, la théorie des deux discours et l’agnostisme nous renseignent sur la conception de la vérité de Protagoras. Par la suite, on constatera le rapprochement de cette conception de la vérité au pragmatisme contemporain, sur les plans du langage, de la vie sociale, du recours à l’expérience et du constructivisme. Cette interprétation permet de saisir l’intérêt philosophique de l’activité rhétorique, et de mieux comprendre la profondeur du problème que les sophistes ont posé à Platon sur la question de la vérité.

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)0.000
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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.929
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.180 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaval théologique et philosophiqueSame topicClassical Philosophy and ThoughtFrench-language works237,207