Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’auteur explore, en quarante-cinq brèves propositions, la proximité et la différence entre « précoce » et « prématuré », en y insérant la question de l’originaire et de l’après-coup. Il est proposé, entre autres, que le précoce relève de l’observation empirique en termes de développement tandis que le prématuré renvoie d’abord au constat de la situation particulière du nouveau-né à la prématurité statutaire. Situation dans laquelle il importe de tenir compte de l’observateur qui en fait le constat, de sorte que l’Hilflösigkeit chez l’humain concerne une relation et donc le nouveau-né, mais aussi l’adulte qui en a soin. Entre les notions de précoce et de prématuré s’insère la notion winnicottienne de profond, qui invoque une complexité psychique redevable de l’après-coup, même si Winnicott ne s’y réfère pas nommément. Objet d’analyse, le profond renvoie à l’originaire comme temps actuel, c’est-à-dire ni précoce ni prématuré, sorte de source temporelle dont le précoce et le prématuré se présentent comme des cristallisations.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".