MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2034049810 · doi:10.1177/000842980103000306

Exhibiting the sacred: Material objects, religious history, and the Canadian Museum of Civilization

2001· article· en· W2034049810 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
James Opp

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCivilizationChristianityContext (archaeology)Embodied cognitionSign (mathematics)NarrativeHistoryHistory of ChristianityAestheticsArtLiteraturePhilosophyEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To commemorate the Christian bimillennium, the Canadian Museum of Civilization opened an exhibit entitled Under the Sign of the Cross: Creative Expressions of Christianity in Canada. Although one of the goals of the display was to illustrate the "impact" of Christianity on Canada, the exhibit was noticeably lacking historical context. This article explores the curatorial principles that guided the planning and execution of the exhibit. It argues that the lack of attention to an historical narrative was directly related to assumptions underlying the collection of material objects of religion and an attempt to redeem a "sacred" status for the artefacts on display. Unfortunately, this loss of context also meant that many of the original multiple meanings embodied by these material objects of religion were also lost.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.477

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0230.041
Scholarly communication0.0120.003
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.333
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2001
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Religion/Sciences ReligieusesSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207