MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396579536 · doi:10.18162/fp.2012.a6

La civilité pour la douceur de vivre

2012· article· fr· W4396579536 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Denis Jeffrey

Bibliographic record

VenueFormation et profession · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Literary Analyses
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

C HRONIQUE • Éthique en éducationPourquoi discuter de civilité aujourd'hui?Montaigne (1533-1592) en son temps soutenait qu' elle était un art de se comporter avec les autres en vue d'adoucir les moeurs.Quelques années plus tôt, Érasme (1466-1536) reprochait à ses contemporains leur rusticité.Leurs us et coutumes étaient à mille lieues des nôtres.Il est vrai qu' on ne connaissait pas encore, dans l'Europe du XVI e siècle, l'urinoir, le mouchoir, la fourchette et les linges de table.L'humanisme naissant avec la Quattrocento, qui correspond à la fin du Moyen Âge, sera préoccupé par les bonnes manières et le savoir-vivre.

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 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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.875
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.002
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.292
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFormation et professionSame topicHistorical and Literary AnalysesFrench-language works237,207