Bibliographic record
Abstract
Comment interviennent le magistère romain, les conférences épiscopales et les diocèses dans la formation des agents pastoraux et quel est leur impact sur celle-ci ? Au vu de la recomposition du paysage ministériel dans les pays occidentaux — diminution du nombre de prêtres, développement du ministère diaconal, déploiement des missions confiées à des laïcs… —, cet article se penche sur la formation de l’ensemble de ces acteurs — prêtres, diacres permanents et laïcs en mission ecclésiale — afin de dégager comment les différentes instances conçoivent et interviennent sur leur formation respective. Cette enquête se fonde sur des documents normatifs romains actuels ainsi que les normes, orientations ou réflexions en cours localement ; ces données ont été collectées grâce à des contacts pris en France, en Belgique ainsi qu’en Suisse francophones. Au fil du parcours se dégagent des éléments de réflexion sur l’impact des différents niveaux de pouvoir sur la formation des agents pastoraux.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".