Bibliographic record
Abstract
Les Essais de Montaigne sont Poeuvre la plus indispensable pour quiconque veut comprendre l’histoire de la pensee occidentale depuis le 16e siècle (T.S. Eliot dixit). De par la grande diversite des themes explores, cet ouvrage s’adresse a tous ceux (specialistes et amateurs) qui s’interessent ce grand ecrivain-philosophe français. Parmi les aspects importants de l’oeuvre de Montaigne qui sont examines se trouvent l’Apologie de Raymond Sebond, l’autoportrait dans l’essai De la presomption, la poetique montaignienne, les rapports entre le texte et le lecteur, la metaphore de la balance dans Des livres et De trois commerces, le “desordre” des Essais, Porthodoxie religieuse de l’auteur, les rapports Montaigne/Descartes, la notion de l’ame, les “causes perdues” de l’histoire et les excipit des Essais . Dans les onze communications que renferme ce volume, communications faites par des specialistes canadiens, americains et français lors du colloque organise en 1980 par l’Universite de Western Ontario à l’occasion du quatrieme centenaire de la publication des Essais , les auteurs ont aborde maints aspects de Poeuvre, tout en mettant a contribution les abondantes ressources de la critique de ces dernieres decennies. Tant d’analyses penetrantes ne manqueront pas de passionner tous les lecteurs des Essais de Montaigne .
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.245 | 0.079 |
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".