Faut-il se souvenir du républicanisme anglais ? L’héritage intellectuel du républicanisme anglais dans le temps long
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Si l’on s’en tient à une histoire institutionnelle de surface – l’Interrègne a duré onze ans (1649-60), et le régime républicain proprement dit, le Commonwealth, n’en a duré que trois (1649-53 –, il pourrait sembler que le républicanisme anglais n’a constitué qu’une brève parenthèse que l’on peut aisément oublier. Pourtant, si l’on revient aux sources intellectuelles de ce courant, si l’on songe à l’importance de sa production théorique au moment de la première Révolution anglaise et de sa réception en Grande-Bretagne, dans les Îles britanniques, en Europe et en Amérique ; si l’on songe enfin au rôle manifeste ou souterrain qu’il a pu jouer dans les révolutions transatlantiques, alors le républicanisme anglais apparaît comme un objet d’études à part entière pour les historiens de la pensée politique. Cette tradition intellectuelle en Grande-Bretagne a fait, au cours des dernières décennies, l’objet d’un intérêt constant.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".