MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1995238694 · doi:10.1080/14927713.2009.9651428

Does the gospel of Luke suggest a Christian‐Judaic form of leisure in the Graeco‐Roman world?

2009· article· en· W1995238694 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Karen M. Fox

Bibliographic record

VenueLeisure/Loisir · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGospelScholarshipRhetorical questionSituatedPoliticsEarly ChristianityLiteratureHistoryClassicsArtPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditionally in leisure studies, the “origin” of leisure begins with the Greek concept of schole. However, the Graeco‐Roman world was a vibrant, diverse, and commercial socio‐political world. The focus on only one Greek concept of leisure to the exclusion of competing Greek ideas and other cultures obscures the multiplicity and contested forms of leisure in the Graeco‐Roman world. The canonical gospels of the Christian‐Judaic heritage provided glimpses and rhetorical structures that situated the “historical” Jesus within a specific human world that challenged or modified leisure practices of that era. Blending scholarship from histories and theories of leisures (Fox & Klaiber, 2006), archaeological, anthropological, and historical understandings of the Graeco‐Roman world, and literary interpretations of the canonical gospels, I argue that the Gospel of Luke is an alternative format for a Christian‐Judaic leisure.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.028
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.266 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations2
Published2009
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeisure/LoisirSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207