À propos de l’école de Paris : quelques repères pour la consultation psychosomatique
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In his report, the author suggests that psychoanalysts working in hospitals must deal with the distinct nature of the psychoanalytic listening of somatic patients. The author defines the theoretic base for psychoanalytic listening as psychosomatics (as opposed to psychosomatic medicine). The author presents two models from which descend all the various psychoanalytic approaches of psychosomatic clinics. Emphasis is mostly placed on contributions made by the Ecole de Paris : the importance given to sensorimotor manifestations ; the evolutionist point of view ; the development of an original psychosomatic nosography, inspired by psychoanalysis ; and the somatization processes. The study covers a wide range of aspects, namely theoretical and clinical considerations of allergy as a structural phenomenon and as a way of relating to the world ; operational thinking in its proper historical context ; essential depression as a notion of great importance in psychosomatics. The author finally draws a profile of the various forms of psychoanalytic treatments offered to somatic patients.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".