MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2228018601 · doi:10.4000/rh19.4884

John Stuart Mill et Harriet Taylor. Écrits sur l’égalité des sexes, textes traduits et présentés par Françoise Orazi

2015· article· fr· W2228018601 on OpenAlexaff
Valentine Brunet

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue d histoire du XIXe siècle · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsECW Press (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtMillPhilosophyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C’est une anthologie fort utile que propose Françoise Orazi. John Stuart Mill est l’un des premiers philosophes anglo-saxons à avoir défendu la cause des femmes avec conviction, inspiré par le regard critique que portait sa compagne Harriet Taylor sur la condition féminine dans l’Angleterre victorienne. Aussi l’anthologie repose-t-elle sur la mise en évidence de ce que l’éditrice nomme la « double auteurité » des écrits milliens sur l’égalité des sexes. Ce choix s’inscrit dans la lignée des t...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.246 · 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
GenreReview

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue d histoire du XIXe siècleSame topicPolitical Theory and InfluenceFrench-language works237,207