Reading James with new eyes : methodological reassessments of the letter of James
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction by Robert L. Webb and John S. Kloppenborg Ideological Strategies in the Letter of by Alicia Batten, Pacific Lutheran University Reception and Emulation of the Jesus Traditions in by John S. Kloppenborg, University of Toronto The Languages of 'Household' and 'Kingdom' in the Epistle of James: Socio-Rhetorical by Wesley H. Wachob, Candler School of Theology, Emory University A Reassessment of the Rhetoric of the Epistle of James and Its Implications for Christian Origins by Duane F. Watson, School of Theology, Malone College. Anti-Imperial Discourse in James 2:14-26: Postcolonial Reading by Jason Coker, Drew University Pure and Undefiled Religion': Purity and Pollution as a Means of Cultural Antagonism in the Epistle of by Darian Lockett, University of St. Andrews The Letter of James as a Document of Paulinism? Study in Reception-History by Margaret M. Mitchell, University of Chicago.
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 | 0.033 | 0.099 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.028 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.021 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".