MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1599306037

Yom Kippur in Hell

2007· article· en· W1599306037 on OpenAlexaff
E. Morgan

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsParallelsDoctrineLawPrayerInternational lawPeacemakingHistoryLiteraturePolitical sciencePhilosophyArtReligious studies
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay explores the idea, or rather the mirage, of progress in international law. It does so by examining a specific case study from the Cold War era: the conflict resolution efforts of the Security Council in the aftermath of the 1973 Arab-Israeli war. It is contended that the paralysis that characterized the central peacemaking institution at this point in its history is not unique to the specific moment in time. Rather, the historic case study demonstrates that instances of international law's progress, as scholars are prone to think of such significant institutional and doctrinal events, are more akin to markers along the meandering route of an empty vessel. In terms of methodology, this essay traces a parallel between the themes of international law and the short stories of Yiddish writer I.L. Peretz. In particular, the essay uses as a parable Peretz' short story Yom Kippur in Hell, in which a cantor who chants with a beautiful voice, but who is substantively lacking in devotion, is condemned. It is the theory of the essay that the futility of salvation through empty prayer neatly parallels the futility of progress through empty doctrine, as exhibited by international law.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.291
Teacher spread0.277 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207