Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet entretien réalisé par Simon Levesque pour le compte du Cygne noir, Ansgar Rougemont-Bücking discute de sa pratique psychiatrique et psychothérapeutique, qui passe par l’administration de substances psychédéliques (kétamine, MDMA, LSD et psilocybine) à ses patient·e·s. Cette pratique médicale prend place dans le cadre de son cabinet privé, à Vevey en Suisse. Le docteur Rougemont-Bücking se montre très sensible aux questions environnementales et prône une cultivation de notre conscience capable, selon lui, de mener à un changement de paradigme profond dans notre façon de penser et d’agir en société. Le monde du travail moderne, en particulier, lui apparaît porter les marques d’un état psychique collectif délétère, qui ressortit à l’autodestruction. L’entretien est aussi l’occasion d’échanger sur une autre passion qui anime le privat-docent de médecine à l’Université de Fribourg et chef de clinique scientifique au Réseau fribourgeois de santé mentale : l’alpinisme.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.003 |
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".