MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3081713878 · doi:10.4000/books.pumi.38763

La délibération dans les conciles de la province de Sens au XVe siècle : libre débat ou parole hiérarchisée ?

2010· book-chapter· fr· W3081713878 on OpenAlex
Christine Barralis

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.

Bibliographic record

VenuePresses universitaires du Midi eBooks · 2010
Typebook-chapter
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReformation and Early Modern Christianity
Canadian institutionsSaint Paul University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

« Quod omnes tangit, ab omnibus tractari et approbari debet » : ce principe bien connu de l’ecclésiologie occidentale est un des fondements de l’importance accordée aux assemblées conciliaires au Moyen Âge. Est-ce pour autant que la parole peut s’exprimer librement au sein de ces assemblées ? Existe-t-il des conditions, explicites ou implicites, pour y faire entendre son avis ? Dans quelle mesure la prise de parole est-elle limitée aux experts ou aux autorités supérieures ? Le concile émet-il...

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.970
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.202
Teacher spread0.186 · 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