MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3172404628 · doi:10.4000/cerri.3138

La critique du droit romain et la philosophie du droit dans les œuvres des Pères de l’Église Tertullien et de Lactance

2021· article· fr· W3172404628 on OpenAlex

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

VenueCahiers d’études du religieux · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicClassical Studies and Legal History
Canadian institutionsPublic Works and Government Services Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriticismPhilosophyLawChurch FathersPolitical scienceTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteur analyse l’influence exercée par le droit romain et l’art de la rhétorique sur les œuvres apologétiques de Tertullien et de Lactance. Cependant leur rapport vis-à-vis de ces arts profanes était problématique. C’est ainsi que la première partie de l’article illustre la façon dont les deux Pères de l’Église ont critiqué la rhétorique profane et ses limites afin de résoudre ce dilemme. La deuxième partie de l’article montre comment ces derniers ont développé leur réflexion autour de notions clés telles que la loi naturelle et la justice à travers l’art de la rhétorique.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.863
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
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 head0.013
GPT teacher head0.248
Teacher spread0.236 · 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