MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2004800485 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.25.3.333

Interpretive Treatments of Genesis in Comics: R. Crumb & Dave Sim

2013· article· en· W2004800485 on OpenAlex
Don Jolly

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 Religion and Popular Culture · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComics and Graphic Narratives
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisComicsContext (archaeology)StorytellingArtLiteratureDimension (graph theory)HistoryNarrativeArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: In recent years, several interesting and complex exegetical works have been produced in the comic book format. The most notable are Robert Crumb’s Illustrated Book of Genesis, and the elaborate Genesis commentary by Dave Sim as part of his long-running independent series Cerebus. Crumb, I argue, uses the comic book format as a means to limit the theological dimension of the text. Sim, by contrast, subordinates the elements of his form to the creation of a highly idiosyncratic exegesis. A close examination of both works charts two radically different and innovative exegetical styles, united by the use of the novel methods of visual storytelling and existence within the context of previous Bible comics. This examination seeks to make these methods accessible to the religious scholar, thus opening the field of graphic exegesis to further examination.

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 score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.243

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 communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.016
GPT teacher head0.246
Teacher spread0.230 · 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