MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2342008656 · doi:10.1525/rh.2015.33.3.230

L'institution oratoire idéale d'Henri, roi de Pologne

2015· article· fr· W2342008656 on OpenAlexaff
Luc Vaillancourt

Bibliographic record

VenueRhetorica · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Influence and Diplomacy
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Chicoutimi
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans ce qui s'apparente à une missive destinée à Guy du Faur de Pibrac, orateur réputé et proche conseiller, le nouveau roi élu de Pologne réclame des leçons d’éloquence. Le présent article se propose d'analyser cette requête de manière à identifier les parties ou procédés privilégiés par Henri et de préciser ce qu'ils nous révèlent sur sa conception personnelle de l'art oratoire, sur le choix même de Pibrac comme maître de rhétorique et sur les contingences qui le poussent à vouloir s'instruire. L'accent mis sur les questions relatives au registre délibératif, plutôt que judiciaire ou épidictique, semble révélateur des priorités nettement politiques du souverain.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.082

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0120.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.282 · 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
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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRhetoricaSame topicHistorical Influence and DiplomacyFrench-language works237,207