MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058556222 · doi:10.1558/rsth.v25i1.5

God, Time, Space, and the Infinite

2006· article· en· W2058556222 on OpenAlexaff
John King‐Farlow, Richard Bosley

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicKarl Barth and Christian Theology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEpistemologyContrast (vision)Space (punctuation)PhilosophySpacetimeLinguisticsSociologyComputer sciencePhysicsArtificial intelligenceQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Philosophical discourse takes many forms, and this introduction to a website discussion suggests that the dialogue, once the heart of philosophical reasoning, promotes a particular type of encounter that leads to amicable discourse, in contrast to some forms that take no prisoners. This is an invitation to determine whether the dialogue can bear all that it is presumed to do.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.048
Scholarly communication0.0070.008
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.192 · 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

Citations0
Published2006
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicKarl Barth and Christian TheologyFrench-language works237,207