MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416623178 · doi:10.1515/kant-2025-2026

L’évaluation critique du concept de monade de Béguelin à Kant

2025· article· en· W4416623178 on OpenAlex
François Duchesneau

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueKant-Studien · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsUniversité de Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsInterpretation (philosophy)MetaphysicsOrder (exchange)Natural (archaeology)Subject (documents)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The Preisfrage proposed by the Berlin Academy in 1788 on the progress of metaphysics in Germany reflected, to some extent, the endeavor of certain academics who sought to reform Leibnizian monadology. This intention was also present in Kant’s Über eine Entdeckung, nach der alle neue Kritik der reinen Vernunft, durch eine ältere entbehrlich gemacht werden soll and in the drafts in which he would address the Academy’s question. This article aims to analyze Nicolas de Béguelin’s critical interpretation of the concept of monads, understood as representing the elements of natural reality beyond phenomena. In two of his memoirs published in the Academy’s yearbooks, Béguelin resolved this issue through an analogical use of the connotations of organic teleology, in order to formulate a hypothesis that would prove consonant with the requirements of experience-bound knowledge. Certain limited convergences between Béguelin’s views and Kant’s are then described and assessed.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.824
Threshold uncertainty score0.525

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.228 · 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