MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1986768975 · doi:10.5508/jhs.2012.v12.a3

Literacy, Utopia and Memory: Is There a Public Teaching in Deuteronomy?

2012· article· en· W1986768975 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hebrew Scriptures · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)LiteracyUtopiaPeriod (music)PopulationLiteraturePhilosophyHistorySociologyArtLinguisticsPedagogyAestheticsDemographyArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Let me start with the obvious: The society to which the Pentateuchal texts refer consisted of a small group of “intellectual” elites that mastered the art of writing and reading, and a vast major- ity of illiterate people. Some scholars estimate literacy to cover no more than five percent of the population. This may have changed in Hellenistic times, but it applies to the whole period of the evolu- tion of Deuteronomy, which stretches from late pre-exilic times through the exilic and possibly into the early Persian time.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.273
Threshold uncertainty score0.858

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 studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.233 · 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