MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1999415669 · doi:10.1080/0048721x.2012.705654

Of the making of one book: contemporary introductions to Judaism

2012· article· en· W1999415669 on OpenAlexaff
Ira Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueReligion · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish Identity and Society
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJudaismChristianityReligious studiesPresentation (obstetrics)HistoryLiteratureSociologyAestheticsPhilosophyTheologyArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article discusses some of the major issues inherent in introductory courses in Judaism through an examination of seven books that were written to serve as textbooks for such a course. The seven authors surveyed are Jews who are writing about their own religious tradition as insiders, and their books are to some extent expressions of their particular orientations as Jews. It is clear to all the authors that one volume cannot by itself say everything that needs to be said about a complex religious tradition thousands of years in the making. One important commonality is their emphasis on the relationship of Judaism to Christianity. This aspect of the presentation of Judaism bespeaks the Christian (or post-Christian) nature of the English-speaking societies for which the textbooks have been created. As well, it reminds us of the imposed nature of the term ‘Judaism’ to describe the religious expression of Jews. While their approaches to the manifold historical and contemporary meanings of Judaism vary considerably, all of them are engaged in a balancing act that seeks to convey the complex historical heritage of the Jews along with other criteria more common in the study of religions, such as beliefs and rituals.

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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.105

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0310.007

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 head0.046
GPT teacher head0.316
Teacher spread0.270 · 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
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligionSame topicJewish Identity and SocietyFrench-language works237,207