Philippe de Mézières et Pierre de Thomas : amitié, émotions, et sainteté au XIVe siècle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore l’amitié entre l’homme saint Pierre de Thomas (1305-1366), Carmélite, diplomate, et patriarque de Constantinople et son biographe plus jeune, Philippe de Mézières (1327-1405) écrivain, conseiller royal et penseur politique célèbre. Une analyse du vocabulaire émotif montre que le texte de la Vie de Saint Pierre de Thomas (1366) s’inscrit dans une tradition biblique (les Cantiques) et classique de l’amitié. Ce qui nous intéresse ici c’est comment l’expression des émotions (réelles ou gouvernées par des formules – ou les deux ?) donne une forme au récit hagiographique qui distingue ce texte des productions hagiographiques contemporaines et offre un modèle de sainteté qui se détache en partie de la tradition. L’analyse se concentre sur une sélection de scènes particulièrement émouvantes : leur première rencontre lors d’une épidimie de la peste en Chypre; la mort de Pierre de Thomas et son apparition comme revenant.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".