MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2148033824 · doi:10.3917/ahdlm.079.0289

Deux questions inédites de Jacques de Viterbe sur les habitus

2013· article· fr· W2148033824 on OpenAlex
Antoine Côté

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives d histoire doctrinale et littéraire du Moyen Âge · 2013
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicMedieval Philosophy and Theology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyHabitusSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On trouvera ici la présentation et l’édition de deux brèves questions de l’Ermite de saint Augustin, Jacques de Viterbe. Dans la première question, Jacques s’attache à montrer en quel sens il est légitime de dire que les habitus moraux sont innés. Dans la seconde question, il défend la thèse que les habitus des principes moraux appartiennent de façon plus intime à l’âme que les habitus intellectuels. Comme le Viterbien oppose sa position à celle de Thomas d’Aquin, on tente dans la dernière partie de l’article de cerner les raisons philosophiques du désaccord entre les deux auteurs.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.662
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.200 · 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