MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4245347599 · doi:10.7202/019176ar

La condition tragique de l’homme dans la Silve IV des Juvenilia de Théodore de Bèze

2008· article· fr· W4245347599 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John Nassichuk

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes françaises · 2008
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Trois ans avant la publication de l’Abraham sacrifiant, Théodore de Bèze publie au sein de ses Juvenilia (1548) une Silve latine qu’il désigne comme la préface des Psaumes pénitentiaux. Ce poème narratif en hexamètres propose une récriture de l’épisode au deuxième livre de Samuel, dans lequel David commet le péché d’adultère avec Bethsabée et envoie à une mort certaine Urie, le mari de la jeune femme. Bèze souligne le caractère puissant et diabolique de la tentation à laquelle David, roi pieux, n’évite pas de succomber. Dans un échantillon remarquable d’imitatio virgiliana, il narre dans le détail la réaction du pénitent lorsque celui-ci apprend que son méfait a suscité la colère de Dieu. Au lieu d’inscrire son apologie de David dans la lignée patristique qui depuis saint Ambroise perçoit le fils de Jessé comme une préfiguration du Christ, l’exemplum de l’homme pieux susceptible de pécher lorsque la tentation semble irrésistible, Bèze s’intéresse davantage à la souffrance intérieure et spirituelle de l’homme élu mais coupable devant Dieu. Le caractère proprement tragique de l’épisode réside dans cette souffrance du pécheur qui regrette vainement son état antérieur.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0070.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.249
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes françaisesSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207