MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989842719 · doi:10.7202/1065194ar

Spiritualité

2019· article· fr· W2989842719 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2019
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans ce court article, nous entendons retracer l’histoire sémantique du mot spiritualité afin de mieux saisir la signification du concept que l’on évoque aujourd’hui. Puis, on présentera le cas du monachisme chrétien primitif, où les questions sous-jacentes à l’utilisation de ce terme semblent — toute distinction faite — les mêmes qu’à l’époque actuelle. Le but de ces quelques propos est, d’une part, de rappeler à quel point la notion de spiritualité est culturellement connotée et liée à une histoire spécifique qui en a déterminé l’évolution jusqu’à ses utilisations les plus récentes et, d’autre part, proposer une interrogation quant à la récurrence — réelle ou illusoire ? — de certaines questions dans l’histoire des concepts et, par extension, dans l’histoire de la religion. L’enjeu est celui d’un comparatisme capable de légitimer l’établissement de catégories conceptuelles potentiellement récurrentes, premier pas dans la fondation d’universels admissibles dans les sciences sociales.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.813
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.013

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.311 · 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