Freudiens et Jungiens, À la Rencontre de l’Autre
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'histoire des institutions psychanalytiques permet de constater combien la filiation est affaire d'ambivalence, d'amour et de haine cannibaliques et castrateurs, de meurtre et de culpabilité.La vie institutionnelle n'est-elle pas jalonnée de conflits passionnels qui surgissent tout à coup, nous prennent toujours à découvert et marquent l'évolution du groupe ?Et ces combats se livrent si souvent sur le terrain de la transmission et de la filiation.Le groupe avance en cherchant à élaborer ce qui reste seulement agi, ce qui est une manière de souligner la nécessité de penser les origines toujours en mouvement, en refondation 2 .» Martin Gauthier, psychanalyste freudien 1 L'article d'Élizabeth Roudinesco paru dans le quotidien Le Monde du 26 octobre 2018 sous le titre « La correspondance inédite entre Carl Jung et son disciple Erich Neumann éclaire les ambivalences du célèbre psychologue suisse [et en sous-titre] De l'inégalité des inconscients.» 2 Extrait de « L'interprétation : pour une mise en chantier », in Revue Filigrane, vol.27, no 2, 2018, p. 17-27.
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 | 0.005 | 0.026 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.003 |
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".