Bibliographic record
Abstract
Au chapitre 15 du Manuel , Épictète mentionne Diogène et Héraclite comme exemples d’hommes divins qui doivent inspirer la conduite de l’homme qui cherche à devenir un convive des dieux et à participer au gouvernement divin. La mention d’Héraclite, dans le contexte cynique du chapitre 15, est plutôt inattendue et les commentateurs éprouvent d’ailleurs de la difficulté à en rendre compte. Héraclite n’est pas, en effet, un modèle éthique pour la majorité des stoïciens et Épictète lui-même n’en fait jamais mention dans le reste du Manuel et dans les Entretiens . Bien que la tradition manuscrite rapporte unanimement le nom d’Héraclite, c’est probablement celui d’Héraklès qu’il faut lire dans ce passage du chapitre 15. Cette correction se justifie, entre autres, par l’importance et la fréquence des mentions d’Héraklès dans les Entretiens et par le fait que son nom y est également associé à celui de Diogène.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".