MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2909762412 · doi:10.3917/etr.933.0361

Les réponses des Psaumes 3-19 et 108-110 aux titres des Psaumes 56-60

2018· article· fr· W2909762412 on OpenAlexaff
Bernard Gosse

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes théologiques et religieuses · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTheology and Canon Law Studies
Canadian institutionsBibliothèque et Archives nationales du Québec
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Selon l’analyse proposée par Bernard Gosse , les titres davidiques des Ps 56-60, avec l’expression mktm ldwd (inversion dans le Ps 60), renvoient par le jeu de correspondances verbales aux épreuves de David d’après les livres de Samuel. Dans la ligne de la réponse donnée par le titre de Ps 18,1 concernant le salut de David, salut élargi à sa descendance en Ps 18,51, les Ps 3-19 (avec ldwd mktm en Ps 16,1) et 108-110 (avec reprise des Ps 57 et 60 dans le Ps 108) répondent par des réaffirmations messianiques davidiques aux épreuves du messie selon les Ps 57-60.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.019
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.019
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.104
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.257 · 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
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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes théologiques et religieusesSame topicTheology and Canon Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207