Le don d’objets dans les testaments de femmes parisiennes (xvie-xviiie siècles)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Alors que la coutume de Paris autorisait les femmes de toute condition à tester et qu’elles ont été plus nombreuses que les hommes à le faire dans la capitale entre le xvie siècle et le premier tiers du xviiie siècle, cet article analyse en contexte les modalités des dons d’objets effectués, dans un corpus de 34 testaments féminins conservés au Minutier central des notaires parisiens (Archives nationales). La position et l’appartenance sociales des testatrices sont rapportées à l’évolution de leurs pratiques en matière de transmission de leurs biens, de façon à préciser la place qu’y prenait le don d’objet. Les spécificités de ces objets, les modifications de leur composition et de leurs destinataires, dans et au dehors de la parenté sont également prises en compte et confrontées à la question du statut économique et symbolique des objets donnés.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
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".