MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7128645274 · doi:10.26180/5005127

Santiago Zabala (ed.) Weakening Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Gianni Vattimo. Monteal & Kingston; London; Ithaca: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 2007 [Review Article]

2017· article· W7128645274 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ashley Woodward

Bibliographic record

VenueMonash University · 2017
Typearticle
Language
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicItalian Literature and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHonourKingdomPeriod (music)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

According to Manfred Frank, Gianni Vattimo is the man whose name occurs immediately to one and all when someone calls for the leading Italian philosopher and intellectual. While much of Vattimo s work has been translated into English (he is perhaps best-known for the book The End of Modernity), there has been little critical reaction to this work. Finally, a volume of critical essays has become available in English with the publication of Weakening Philosophy: Essays in Honour of Gianni Vattimo. The volume is edited by Vattimo s disciple Santiago Zabala, who also provides an ex-cellent introduction to Vattimo and his philosophy of weak thought (pensiero debole), containing much biographical background not previously available. The contributors are all distinguished philosophers and theologians in their own right, and among those well-known in the English-speaking world are Umberto Eco, Charles Taylor, Hugh J. Silverman, Reiner Schür-mann, Richard Rorty, Manfred Frank, and Jean-Luc Nancy. (Zabala ex-plains in his introduction that Jacques Derrida was also invited to be a part of this project, and was keen to write an essay for his friend Gianni, but was sadly prevented from doing so by his failing health (34)).

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.010

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.215
Teacher spread0.195 · 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
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMonash UniversitySame topicItalian Literature and CultureFrench-language works237,207