MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016647002 · doi:10.3917/aphi.832.0105

Schelling et l’architecture

2020· article· fr· W3016647002 on OpenAlexaff
Mildred Galland-Szymkowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueArchives de Philosophie · 2020
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and Hegel
Canadian institutionsCanadian Nautical Research Society
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesImitationArchitecturePhilosophyArtPsychologyVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’article analyse le sens que prend l’architecture dans la philosophie de Schelling vers 1802/05. On montre comment ce dernier subvertit la thèse de l’architecture-art comme imitation de la simple construction, pour finalement définir l’art architectural par sa capacité à présenter, dans l’inorganique, des allégories de l’organique. On illustre pour finir concrètement différents niveaux de compréhension de cette caractérisation, d’une part avec des exemples tirés de Schelling, d’autre part avec des édifices architecturaux récents relevant à divers titres de la bioinspiration.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.057

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.025
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.207 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArchives de PhilosophieSame topicNietzsche, Schopenhauer, and HegelFrench-language works237,207