MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2129246201 · doi:10.7202/039711ar

Idées : le platonisme phénoménologique d’Albert Lautman

2010· article· fr· W2129246201 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hourya Benis-Sinaceur

Bibliographic record

VenuePhilosophiques · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La question fondamentale d’Albert Lautman concerne la nature du réel et la capacité de l’esprit de l’appréhender. C’est pourquoi elle convoque les données de la physique, leur expression en concepts mathématiques et leur interprétation métaphysique qui doit préciser le rapport de la pensée humaine à la réalité du monde. L’examen des théories mathématiques les plus sophistiquées de son temps (surface de Riemann, loi de réciprocité quadratique, théorie du corps de classes) est destinée à montrer l’affinité de la genèse des concepts mathématiques avec une Dialectique supérieure, qui met en jeu les Idées, comprises en un sens dérivé de Platon. Mon but est d’expliquer comment Lautman comprend les termes « Dialectique », « Idée », « genèse », simultanément sur le plan métaphysique et dans leur incarnation mathématique. Je montrerai que Lautman développe une conception très personnelle du platonisme, différente de celle de la version reçue par la tradition philosophique. Lautman rejette la séparation des Idées et du sensible, et adopte le style de pensée heideggerien pour montrer que les Idées sont mues par une Dialectique et qu’elles entretiennent une relation réciproque, dialectique, avec le sensible.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

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 studies0.0060.021
Scholarly communication0.0050.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.101
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.184 · 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
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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhilosophiquesSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207