MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4292848810 · doi:10.46530/ecdp.v0i32.557

Adorno avec Sade…

2022· article· es· W4292848810 on OpenAlexaff
Rebecca Comay

Bibliographic record

VenueEn-claves del pensamiento · 2022
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCritical Theory and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artículo analiza cómo la obra de Sade puede leerse para iluminar las aporías de la razón ilustrada y la ley moral. Sade ha sido contemplado como el retorno de lo reprimido en la razón kantiana (Adorno) o como el secreto impensado que anima todo el sistema moral de Kant (Lacan). El artículo sostiene que leer a Sade con Adorno podría significar cuestionar el círculo vicioso de la repetición de la transgresión y la ley, así como el tedio de una racionalidad instrumental, para abrir una nueva comprensión de la ontología y la historia.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.019
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.304 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEn-claves del pensamientoSame topicCritical Theory and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207