MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2115233145 · doi:10.7202/1032602ar

Institutionnaliser le droit à l’insurrection. L’article 35 de la constitution montagnarde de 1793

2015· article· fr· W2115233145 on OpenAlexaffvenue
François Charbonneau

Bibliographic record

VenueTangence · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicEuropean Political History Analysis
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesConstitutionOppressionPhilosophyPolitical scienceEthnologySociologyLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ce texte porte sur une clause de la Constitution de l’an i qui fait de la résistance à l’oppression « le plus sacré des devoirs ». L’interprétation de l’inclusion de cette clause a le plus souvent fait l’unanimité parmi les rares commentateurs qui ont accordé plus de quelques lignes à en analyser les tenants et aboutissants. L’interprétation généralement admise suggère que Saint-Just aurait tout simplement voulu justifier rétroactivement les massacres de septembre 1792. Le texte qui suit suggère plutôt qu’il y a une cohérence interne à cette constitution qui explique pourquoi le droit de résistance à l’oppression doit logiquement en coiffer l’énoncé des droits. Comme bien des penseurs avant eux, Saint-Just et Hérault de Séchelles, les deux plumes de cette constitution qui ne sera finalement jamais mise en oeuvre, tentaient de résoudre un problème politique classique : celui du contrepoids au pouvoir de l’exécutif. Ils trouveront dans la vigilance du peuple le cerbère d’une constitution qui, bien qu’ils ne le sachent pas encore, disparaîtra bientôt avec eux.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.041
Threshold uncertainty score0.081

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.015
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.253
Teacher spread0.223 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTangenceSame topicEuropean Political History AnalysisFrench-language works237,207