MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2162376898 · doi:10.3917/rhs.631.0161

Un successeur de Bouguer : Étienne Bézout (1730-1783), commissaire et expert pour la marine

2010· article· fr· W2162376898 on OpenAlexaff
Liliane Alfonsi

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire des sciences · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNominationHumanitiesNavyPhilosophyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Résumé Entré à l’Académie royale des sciences dès 1758, Étienne Bézout compte, parmi ses tâches, l’obligation d’étudier différents ouvrages et outils présentés à l’Académie. Si dès le début il se voit confier l’étude d’instruments relatifs à la navigation, cela s’amplifiera à partir de 1764, date à laquelle le duc de Choiseul, ministre de la Marine, charge Bézout de réorganiser la formation des officiers de ce corps. Ses visites dans les ports pour faire passer les examens de la Marine l’amènent à appréhender concrètement les problèmes de la navigation. Cela lui vaudra d’être désigné pour juger la validité des critiques énoncées par l’hydrographe Étienne-Nicolas Blondeau à l’encontre du traité de pilotage de Pierre Bouguer. Par ailleurs, cette situation vaut à Bézout de devenir membre de l’Académie de marine de Brest et d’être un des responsables de son association avec l’Académie des sciences. Nous étudierons ces divers points. Enfin, Bézout écrit en 1769 un Traité de navigation que nous pourrons comparer à l’ouvrage de Bouguer sur le même sujet.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.618

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.228 · 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.

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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire des sciencesSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207