Au-delà des mots : analyse de la première édition de l’oeuvre de Pierre de Cafmeyer (1720)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article analyse la première édition du livre de Pierre de Cafmeyer, parue en 1720 à l’occasion du jubilé du Saint Sacrement du Miracle de Bruxelles. L’objectif principal de l’auteur et de l’éditeur est double : d’une part, lutter contre les dissidences et, d’autre part, raviver la dévotion des fidèles. Pour atteindre cet objectif, le livre intègre étroitement la reproduction des tableaux décrivant la légende, offerts à la cathédrale Saints-Michel-et-Gudule cette année-là, que ce soit dans le format in-folio ou in-octavo de l’ouvrage. Ces scènes aident le lecteur à prendre connaissance du récit et à méditer. Le plus petit format peut être emporté par le fidèle dans l’édifice religieux, tandis que le second lui offre la possibilité de se remémorer, chez lui, le cheminement qu’il a fait dans l’église grâce à la reproduction de l’espace ecclésial par le texte et les illustrations.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.002 |
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".