MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387012133 · doi:10.7202/1104210ar

Jos 10,1-15, le miracle de Gabaon, un salut pour Israël

2023· article· fr· W4387012133 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Dany Nocquet

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2023
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

L’étude proposée tente de mieux comprendre le miracle de Gabaon (ville étrangère et cananéenne) en Jos 10,1-15 ses intentions narratives suite à Jos 9, et sa visée historique dans le cadre du livre de Josué. Après Jos 9,1-27 qui raconte l’alliance des Israélites avec les Gabaonites, leur délivrance et leur intégration au service du temple, Jos 10,1-15 montre comment Gabaon, lieu d’une manifestation divine, devient indispensable pour l’installation d’Israël en Canaan. Au salut de Gabaon est lié le salut d’Israël : s’en prendre à Gabaon, c’est s’en prendre à Israël. En soulignant combien ces deux nations sont unies dans un même peuple, Jos 10,1-15 affirme l’unité plurielle d’Israël depuis ses origines. Discutant l’appartenance rédactionnelle de Jos 10,1-15, et l’étonnante position de Jérusalem opposée à Josué, l’étude montre que ce texte tardif provient de la communauté samarienne, reflétant le climat de l’époque perse, marquée par la reconnaissance de la pluralité linguistique et religieuse. En plus de la victoire spectaculaire d’Israël, ce passage prend une certaine distance avec la théologie deutéronomiste. Il met dès lors en valeur une autre théologie yahwiste plus intégrative avec la légitimation de la cohabitation pacifique entre Israélites et Gabaonites.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.369
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.004

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThéologiquesSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207