MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755088222 · doi:10.4000/books.puc.10862

Le cheval, compagnon ou avatar des dieux ?

2017· book-chapter· fr· W2755088222 on OpenAlexaff
Hélène Dubois-Aubin

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses universitaires de Caen eBooks · 2017
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Cultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsMusée de la Civilisation
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La plastique exceptionnelle du cheval, son instinct grégaire et son comportement particulier ont amené l’être humain à lui réserver une place privilégiée dans les modes d’expression naissants. Animaux les plus représentés dans l’art pariétal préhistorique, les équidés sont ensuite d’une importance majeure à partir de la fin de l’âge de Bronze dans les cultures d’Europe du Nord et de l’Ouest. La plupart des divinités des panthéons celtes et germaniques ont été présentées sous un aspect zoomorphe ou polymorphe et de nombreux indices laissent supposer que certaines divinités, tels Epona ou Lug, ont directement été associées au cheval.Dans la majorité des religions anciennes, égyptienne, chinoise ou indo-européenne, dieux et personnages mythologiques sont également conçus sous un aspect zoomorphe. Ils adoptent progressivement une apparence anthropomorphe et sont accompagnés d’animaux pouvant représenter un de leurs attributs. Les créations plastiques de ces civilisations montrent la grande popularité du thème du cheval, notamment lorsque les divinités solaires ou protectrices sont évoquées. Dieux mi-humains, mi-chevalins, les figures asiatiques de Vâlâhaka, de Bâto Kannon ou d’Hayagrîva en sont des exemples remarquables.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.009
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.258
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePresses universitaires de Caen eBooksSame topicDiverse Cultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207