MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108382925 · doi:10.7202/1011728ar

Le totémisme, « aujourd’hui » ?

2012· article· fr· W2108382925 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lionel Obadia

Bibliographic record

VenueAnthropologie et Sociétés · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAnthropological Studies and Insights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Avec Le totémisme aujourd’hui , Lévi-Strauss (1962) pensait refermer la page d’un des plus fameux débats de l’anthropologie et de l’anthropologie des religions, sur une catégorie conceptuelle dont la consistance et la portée transculturelle ont été âprement discutées. Déplaçant la question de l’universalité des attributs empiriques du culte vers l’analyse des propriétés structurelles de classification et d’organisation dualistes, le fondateur du structuralisme devait en même temps disqualifier le débat et dissoudre le concept de totémisme. Bientôt un demi-siècle après sa publication, Le totémisme aujourd’hui n’a toutefois pas définitivement destitué le terme de son pouvoir heuristique. Cet article évoque au final quelques-uns des nouveaux usages d’un concept dont la renaissance est discrète, mais significative.

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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.819
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1000.002

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 head0.244
GPT teacher head0.549
Teacher spread0.305 · 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
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

Citations15
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAnthropologie et SociétésSame topicAnthropological Studies and InsightsFrench-language works237,207