Bibliographic record
Abstract
Trop souvent considéré comme un simple technicien juridique, l’encyclopédiste Boucher d’Argis s’avère plutôt être un « systématiseur » à la fois historique et critique. En effet, il existe dans ses articles un système tripartite voulant diviser la jurisprudence en trois sources : le droit naturel, le droit des gens et le droit civil. Ce système représente une philosophie du droit inédite et une manifestation de son approche historique de la jurisprudence lors des Lumières, une époque trop souvent associée à une anhistoricité caricaturale. Caché derrière des récits d’allure objective, Boucher d’Argis élabore son système en le mettant au service de certaines critiques subtiles visant l’esclavage et les restrictions royales en matière de chasse et de pêche pour étant contraire au droit naturel. Ainsi, cette interprétation de son projet encyclopédique étend sa vocation au-delà de l’érudition et présente une conception plus nuancée de la matière juridique dans l’Encyclopédie.
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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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".