Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dans cet entretien, réalisé en anglais puis traduit en français et édité par Simon Levesque, Susan Petrilli discute de sa carrière universitaire, des jalons qui ont marqué celle-ci et des projets qui continuent de l’animer. Petrilli aborde notamment ses collaborations intellectuelles avec Thomas Sebeok et Augusto Ponzio, ses recherches et travaux pour revitaliser la pensée de Victoria Welby, ainsi que l’influence profonde sur sa pensée des écrits de Charles Sanders Peirce, Mikhaïl Bakhtine, Ferruccio Rossi-Landi et Emmanuel Levinas. Un des objectifs de ce dialogue est d’interroger la place et l’importance de la critique dans la sémioéthique. En l’inscrivant dans un paradigme critique, Petrilli défend la pertinence et l’actualité de cette approche qu’elle a développée pour penser divers problèmes qui affectent notre monde contemporain. Le dialogue est organisé autour des thèmes du vivre-ensemble, de l’altérité, de la précarité, des changements climatiques, de la responsabilité, de l’écoute et du soin.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.008 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".