Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lucien de Samosate (iie siècle) consacre deux ouvrages à l’histoire et aux historiens, l’un, Comment écrire l’histoire, rédigé sous la forme sérieuse d’un manuel, l’autre sous la forme parodique d’un long voyage extraordinaire, les Histoires vraies. Dans cet article, je m’intéresse à la critique qui, par delà la parodie et le fantastique, traverse les Histoires vraies, visant à la fois les poètes, les historiens et les philosophes du passé, en raison des nombreuses choses « prodigieuses et fabuleuses » qu’ils ont écrites. En parcourant les quatre paragraphes qui composent le prologue de cet ouvrage et qui explicitent la pensée et la position de Lucien, il s’agira de montrer que, par le biais de cette histoire fabuleuse, l’auteur entend mener une réflexion sur les différentes formes de récits, historiques et poétiques, et de redéfinir, en particulier, le statut que doit avoir le discours qui porte sur le passé.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".