MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367285164 · doi:10.7202/1092238ar

Indisciplinées mais savantes : sur la possibilité des femmes en philosophie et en théorie critique1

2022· article· fr· W4367285164 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Laurence Pelletier

Bibliographic record

VenueRecherches féministes · 2022
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFeminist Epistemology and Gender Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’auteure interroge le statut suspect et précaire de la « femme philosophe ». À travers la mise en écho de récits de philosophes et de théoriciennes identifiées comme femmes et queers, dans lesquels elles confient leur expérience personnelle de formation et de travail dans le milieu universitaire, l’auteure entend rendre compte des conditions de possibilités d’« être » une femme en philosophie et en théorie critique. Il apparaît que les questions identitaires sexuelles et raciales déterminent la place que ces théoriciennes occupent dans l’institution et constituent les cadres épistémologiques de leur travail et leur pensée en tant que philosophes et intellectuelles. Dès lors, il importe de repenser la discipline philosophique à travers les paradigmes de féminisation et de sexualisation afin d’imaginer de nouvelles épistémologies féministes.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.010
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
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 score0.663
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0100.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.134
GPT teacher head0.393
Teacher spread0.259 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 venueRecherches féministesSame topicFeminist Epistemology and Gender StudiesFrench-language works237,207