Adario et Antoine : figures emblématiques de la Huronie des Lumières ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
La présente enquête se concentre sur les Hurons imaginaires Adario et Antoine Schenraguetton qui apparaissent respectivement dans la Suite du voyage de l’Amérique ou Dialogues de Lahontan (1703) et les Avantures du sieur Claude Le Beau, avocat en parlement. Voyage curieux et nouveau, parmi les Sauvages de l’Amérique septentrionale (1738). Elle vise à montrer que ces deux figures, à travers leurs entretiens, incarnent plusieurs idées contestataires des Lumières, comme la liberté d’expression ainsi que le relativisme culturel et religieux. Loin d’acquiescer, par politesse selon la coutume du pays, à la doctrine des Européens, ces deux personnages dominent chacun à leur manière leur interlocuteur par la vivacité de leur esprit. Alertes intellectuellement et aptes à débattre de questions métaphysiques, ils se présentent comme des « philosophes nuds », dénués de tout vernis mais aussi de tout préjugé, allant même jusqu’à faire le procès du savoir des hommes blancs et des fondements de leurs croyances.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.002 |
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".