MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Alchimie et paracelsisme en France à la fin de la Renaissance (1567-1625)

2015· article· fr· W653504181 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Didier Kahn, Rémi Franckowiak

Bibliographic record

VenueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligious Studies and Spiritual Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Derriere l’imagerie populaire de l’alchimiste assis au secret de son fourneau, il y eut jadis des etres de chair. Qui etaient ces hommes? Comment vivaient-ils? Quelle place tinrent-ils dans la societe et dans le monde intellectuel d’alors? Cette etude de la reception de l’alchimie et des doctrines de Paracelse en France s’attache a la production du livre alchimique et paracelsien et a l’histoire des nombreuses querelles que ce dernier provoque. On etablit chemin faisant la biographie de plusieurs alchimistes, tel Joseph Du Chesne ou Etienne de Clave, et l’on ruine la legende selon laquelle Descartes, de retour d’Allemagne, aurait ete suspecte de rosicrucianisme. L’ouvrage s’acheve sur la grande crise des annees 1620, o¹ une alchimie inclinant tantot au materialisme, tantot au pantheisme, est englobee par les apologetes chretiens dans leur condamnation du mouvement libertin. Alchimie et paracelsisme est le premier d’une serie de trois volumes, ou seront succssivement etudies les cercles alchimiques francais et le mecenat princier qui les favorisa, ainsi que les rapports entre science, religion et litterature dans la France alchimique de la fin de la Renaissance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.270
Threshold uncertainty score0.536

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.091
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.251 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations12
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of ScienceSame topicReligious Studies and Spiritual PracticesFrench-language works237,207