Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’enjeu de cette contribution est d’explorer les réflexions sur les arts stochastiques dans l’Antiquité et de montrer comment les développements concernant « l’art de conjecturer » que l’on trouve chez Galien constituent une option préférable aux voies traditionnelles empruntées par les philosophes pour expliquer la faillibilité inhérente à l’art médical. En distinguant le diagnostic scientifique du diagnostic conjectural, Galien englobe la totalité des cas pertinents pour l’art médical. Le premier, en raison de son caractère général, peut être théorisé. Quant au second, il concerne uniquement le particulier et n’est donc pas susceptible d’entrer dans la théorie, si ce n’est que par la méthode qui le rend possible. Il s’agit donc de dresser une ébauche des mécanismes qui sous-tendent la conjecture technique afin d’exposer la position adroitement élaborée par Galien sur un sujet où l’hégémonie philosophique régnait jusqu’alors.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".