Bibliographic record
Abstract
This lecture series began with some general comments about rhetoric, rhetorical questions, moral problems, and issues relating to the connection between emotions and persuasion. I also offered a detailed overview of an article by Henry Johnstone (2007) in order to show how there are several interesting philosophical questions related to contemporary studies in rhetoric. This lecture, while not exactly picking up on the same set of metaphysical puzzles that perplexed Johnstone, nonetheless takes us into the world of ancient philosophy. Cette série de cours débute par des commentaires généraux sur la rhétorique, les questions rhétoriques, les problèmes moraux, et le rapport entre émotion et persuasion. Elle offre en outre le compte rendu détaillé d’un article par Henry Johnstone afin d’y relever plusieurs questions philosophiques intéressantes reliées aux études contemporaines en rhétorique. Ce cours, bien qu’il ne soulève pas exactement les mêmes mystères métaphysiques qui ont rendu Johnstone perplexe, nous entraîne dans l’univers de la philosophie antique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.017 |
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".