MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2747616146 · doi:10.7202/1040821ar

Isis et Sérapis : pour ou contre Rome. Le conflit littéraire

2017· article· fr· W2747616146 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Stéphanie Briaud

Bibliographic record

VenueCahiers d histoire · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClassical Antiquity Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet article, j’aimerais démontrer comment des discours gréco-romains peuvent être élevés en armes au sein d’une société multiethnique particulière et empreinte de nombreux conflits religieux liés à des oppositions politiques récentes : la société de l’Empire romain du I er siècle av. J.-C. au IV e siècle ap. J.-C. Il s’agit d’abord de présenter les débuts d’une bataille littéraire particulière, soit celle engageant les auteurs contre les cultes isiaques—branche du paganisme venant d’Égypte—en particulier lorsque l’Empire romain se développe suite à la victoire d’Octave sur Marc-Antoine et une certaine Cléopâtre… Il s’agit ensuite de démontrer l’évolution des attaques littéraires qu’ont subies les divinités isiaques, qui est parallèle à celle du statut officiel de l’isiasme et de la religion à Rome face à l’avancée du christianisme. Enfin, nous conclurons sur une (rare) réponse de la communauté isiaque du IV e siècle.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.678
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0140.020
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.267 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCahiers d histoireSame topicClassical Antiquity StudiesFrench-language works237,207