Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet article, nous soutiendrons que le Yi Jing présente une conception d’un devenir qui n’est pas seulement constant, mais différentiel, tout comme chez Gilles Deleuze dans ses livres Différence et répétition et Le bergsonisme. Nous trouvons particulièrement intéressant que Deleuze et les auteurs du Yi Jing mettent le concept du devenir (ou du changement) au premier plan de leurs spéculations et au fondement de leurs ontologies. Bien qu’il y ait de différences marquantes entre la philosophie deleuzienne et la philosophie sous-jacente dans le Yi Jing, fondamentalement, la « répétition de la différence » chez Deleuze et le « changement perpétuel » dans le Yi Jing reviennent au même. Par cet article, nous espérons pouvoir combler quelques lacunes quant aux connexions entre la philosophie occidentale et la philosophie orientale. Un autre objectif consiste à apporter quelque chose de nouveau à la littérature secondaire. Il y a peu de recherches consacrées à la comparaison Philosophie Deleuzienne / Philosophie Chinoise, alors nous espérons apporter une contribution à la littérature comparative en philosophie, ainsi qu’à la littérature secondaire sur Deleuze et le Yi Jing respectivement.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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".