Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’article envisage le rapport entre la génétique textuelle et l’œuvre de Ricœur dans une double perspective. D’une part, il s’agit de mettre à jour les convergences et les divergences entre la critique génétique et l’herméneutique ricœurienne du texte : si le principal point d’intersection réside dans l’identification entre écriture et création, les divergences relèvent par contre de la différence des notions de texte, sur lesquelles Ricœur et la critique génétique s’appuient ; d’autre part, l’article se concentre sur les spécificités de l’œuvre de Ricœur du point de vue génétique : la marque distinctive de l’écriture philosophique de Ricœur est à cerner dans l’ancrage de la rédaction dans un travail extraordinaire de documentation prérédactionnelle ; ce style d’écriture réfléchit à son tour la « voie longue » qui constitue notamment le trait distinctif de l’herméneutique ricœurienne par rapport à celle de Gadamer.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 teacher head, 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".