MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2109147942 · doi:10.7202/004994ar

L'analogie et la vérité chez Franz Brentano

2002· article· fr· W2109147942 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marietje Van Der Schaar

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2002
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les idées aristotéliciennes sur l’analogie qui se trouvent dans la thèse de Brentano peuvent éclairer sa théorie de la vérité, tout comme ce qu’il écrit sur la notion de vérité à la fin de sa vie. Il semble que Brentano ne distingue pas la notion de la vérité et la notion d’évidence ; mais, à vrai dire, il a deux notions de vérité. Au sens originel, un jugement vrai signifie une évidence ; au sens figuré ou analogique, un jugement aveugle, qui correspond à un jugement évident sous tous les autres aspects, est aussi dit vrai. Ce jugement est vrai en tant qu’il peut être jugé avec évidence.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.004

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.134 · 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
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

Citations1
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207