MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780722162 · doi:10.7202/1042445ar

Qohélet 2,12 : un texte indéchiffrable ?

2017· article· fr· W2780722162 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Jean-Jacques Lavoie

Bibliographic record

VenueLaval théologique et philosophique · 2017
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyAllusionLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur présente un état de la recherche de la critique textuelle de Qo 2,12 en montrant qu’il faut maintenir le texte massorétique, puisque c’est le texte le plus difficile. Puis, il présente un état de la recherche de la critique des sources ainsi que de l’analyse structurelle et littéraire, afin de montrer que ce verset doit être lu à la lumière de son contexte immédiat. En effet, la comparaison de la sagesse et de la folie, au v. 12a, annonce la question de l’avantage de la sagesse sur la folie et du sage sur le fou, en 2,13-16. Quant au v. 12b, il annonce la question portant sur la valeur du successeur, en 2,19a, et souligne, non sans ironie, que la valeur du successeur est dérisoire et que celui-ci ne vaut que ce que le prédécesseur, aussi incomparable soit-il, a fait de lui. Ainsi compris, le v. 12 peut aussi se lire comme une allusion à Roboam en 1 R 12.

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)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0090.008
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.294
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLaval théologique et philosophiqueSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207