MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4254497836 · doi:10.3406/ahrf.2006.2951

Dugald Stewart, les « économistes » et la Révolution française

2006· article· en· W4254497836 on OpenAlex
Alexandra Hyard

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

VenueAnnales historiques de la Révolution française · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitical Theory and Influence
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFrench revolutionLegitimacyMonarchyRationalismPoliticsHumanitiesPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Alexandra Hyard, Dugald Stewart, the « Economistes » and the French Revolution In 1789, Dugald Stewart (1753-1828), like many Scottish intellectuals, welcomed the French Revolution. He saw it as the first attempt to apply the principles of French political rationalism that the political theory of the « Economistes » had provided. Stewart, however, grew less and less laudatory about this revolutionary experience. In contrast to the greater part of Scottish public opinion, however, he did not reject the French experiment. If at the beginning of the 1800's, this Scottish philosopher still believed in the legitimacy of the ideas of 1789, it was partly because his whig convictions made him receptive to the political rationalism of the French, and partly because he felt that the solutions of a more rational monarchy as envisaged in the writing of the « Economistes » might prove useful in partially resolving problems encountered by the British monarchy.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.751
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.268 · 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