MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163647496 · doi:10.3917/aphi.842.0013

La longévité comparée des plantes et des animaux selon Aristote

2021· article· fr· W3163647496 on OpenAlex
Andrea Falcon, Sofía Alcaine, Lætitia Monteils-Laeng

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

VenueArchives de Philosophie · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Philosophy and Thought
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Notre propos est ici d’examiner dans quelle mesure Aristote atteint son objectif. Pour ce faire, nous nous concentrerons sur l’approche explicative adoptée dans le traité De longitudine et brevitate vitae ( De la longévité et de la vie brève ), où Aristote se propose de rendre compte de la longévité, sans se limiter aux animaux. Nous discuterons des perspectives que peut ouvrir une telle étude commune aux animaux et aux plantes, mais aussi de ses éventuelles limites. Dans quelle mesure Aristote est-il capable de traiter ensemble la question de la longévité des animaux et des plantes ? La réponse à cette question est au cœur de notre article.

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, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.776
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.006
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.065
GPT teacher head0.279
Teacher spread0.213 · 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