MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4283757220 · doi:10.4000/vertigo.35523

Les prés dans les sociétés rétro-littorales : l’exemple de la Blanchardais (Vue, Loire-Atlantique) au xve siècle

2022· article· fr· W4283757220 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Brice Rabot

Bibliographic record

VenueVertigO · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedieval and Early Modern Justice
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical scienceArtGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Les sources relatives à l’élevage et à l’exploitation des prés en France, et plus précisément en Bretagne méridionale à la fin du Moyen Âge, restent rares et d’ampleur limitée. Ce trait explique en partie l’absence d’intérêt des chercheurs. L’ouverture aux autres disciplines, en particulier la géographie, permet d’élargir les réflexions en posant la question des rapports aux territoires. Comment les paysans et les seigneurs ont-ils mis en valeur des espaces fragiles, soumis régulièrement aux inondations ? Comment ont-ils écoulé les productions sur les marchés locaux et extérieurs ? Comment la mise en valeur des prés a-t-elle marqué, en retour, l’organisation sociale ? La proximité du littoral et des marées a-t-elle eu un impact notoire sur ces territoires ? Ces questions sont autant de pistes auxquelles cet article se propose de réfléchir, en partant de la série comptable de la Blanchardais, seigneurie foncière implantée en rive gauche de l’estuaire de la Loire, dans la commune de Vue (aujourd’hui située dans la région française de la Loire-Atlantique). La proximité de grandes voies de communication a incontestablement facilité les échanges. Mais d’autres aspects sont à prendre en compte, en croisant les cartes et les données tirées des archives.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.271
Threshold uncertainty score0.539

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.007
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.298 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueVertigOSame topicMedieval and Early Modern JusticeFrench-language works237,207