MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2780742370 · doi:10.7202/1089997ar

Le topos de la rencontre chez Veiras et Foigny

2022· article· fr· W2780742370 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Peter Murvai

Bibliographic record

VenueTopiques études satoriennes · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTopos theoryPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

La scène de la rencontre entre Européens et Utopiens dans les oeuvres de Denis Veiras et Gabriel de Foigny représente un topos narratif qui n’acquiert sa pleine signification que lorsqu’on le situe par rapport aux récits des voyages et aux textes utopiques antérieurs. Notre propos est de montrer que la configuration particulière du topo du contact dans les utopies louis-quatorziennes de Veiras et de Foigny est le résultat d’une évolution qui a conduit ces auteurs à mettre en question aussi bien les présupposés idéologiques de la littérature viatique classique que la formule narrative des utopies de la Renaissance.

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)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.231 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTopiques études satoriennesSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207