Bibliographic record
Abstract
Résumé: Il s'agit ici d'analyser la façon dont al-Fārābī (870–950) a interprété l'ēthos aristotélicien dans les Didascalia in Rethoricam Aristotelis ex glosa Alpharabii, introduction de son Grand Commentaire à la Rhétorique d'Aristote. Alors qu'Aristote organise ses moyens de persuasion en fonction du critère de technicité (pisteis entechnoi vs pisteis atechnoi), al-Fārābī choisit de les classer selon un critère formel puisqu'il distingue les moyens de persuasion syllogistiques des moyens de persuasion non syllogistiques. Pour être cernée au plus près, l'interprétation farabienne de l'ēthos aristotélicien nécessite la prise en compte des conditions dans lesquelles la transmission de la Rhétorique d'Aristote s'est opérée dans le monde oriental, ainsi que le contexte culturel, politico-religieux et philosophique propre à la composition des Didascalia.
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".