MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386766461 · doi:10.26443/arc.v48i.314

Immediate Apperception, by Maine de Biran, trans. Mark Sinclair

2020· article· en· W4386766461 on OpenAlexaff
Adam Smith

Bibliographic record

VenueArc The Journal of the School of Religious Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophical and Theoretical Analysis
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsApperceptionArtPhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Maine de Biran (1766-1824) holds an usual place in the history of philosophy.On the one hand, Biran exercised substantial influence on the intellectual discussions of his day, corresponding at length with important French intellectual figures such as the natural scientist André-Marie Ampere (1775-1836).He was among the first French philosophers to read and interpret Immanuel Kant, so he is an important figure in the French reception of German idealism.Although little of his work was published in his lifetime, he was nonetheless a founder of the French spiritualism tradition, a movement which foregrounds questions of the mind (l'esprit) that included some of the most important French philosophers of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries such as Victor Cousin (1792-1867), Félix Ravaisson (1813-1900), and Henri Bergson (1859-1941).For his resonances with German idealism, Hippolyte Taine described Maine de Biran as "un Fichte français." 1 In his own overview of French philosophy, Henri Bergson mused that with Biran's project "on peut se demander si la voie que ce philosophe a ouverte n'est pas celle où la métaphysique devra marcher définitivement." 2 Michel Henry, a French phenomenologist who wrote a study on Biran, considered him to be "that prince of thought, who merits being regarded by us in the same way as Descartes and

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.786
Threshold uncertainty score0.366

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.233
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArc The Journal of the School of Religious StudiesSame topicPhilosophical and Theoretical AnalysisFrench-language works237,207