Quelques remarques épistémologiques et méthodologiques sur le judaïsme et le christianisme de l’Antiquité classique et tardive
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans ces quelques remarques épistémologiques et méthodologiques sur les problèmes que posent les études historiques du judaïsme et du christianisme antiques, on se penche notamment sur les phénomènes de continuité et de discontinuité dont les incidences peuvent être « redoutables » dans les élaborations idéologiques contemporaines. On donne surtout des propos généraux sur le judaïsme et le christianisme dans l’Antiquité classique et tardive au regard des résultats de la recherche actuelle. On parle aussi des rapports entre judaïsme et christianisme à l’époque où ce dernier n’est qu’un mouvement parmi d’autres dans le cadre du premier, et des questions de légitimités qui ont débouché sur des conflits engendrant la distinction ou la séparation et la mise en place progressive de deux religions.
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 | 0.046 | 0.068 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".