MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2111897760 · doi:10.1177/0014524611431774

The Biblical Tale of Two Scouts

2012· article· en· W2111897760 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Expository Times · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsTyndale University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBoy ScoutsPossession (linguistics)PessimismHistoryMedia studiesGenealogySociologyTheologyPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Twelve scouts sent out by Moses surveyed the land. What happened next is frequently misread by people, even by Bible teachers, as being that ten scouts brought back a pessimistic report, “We can’t defeat these people”, while two of them, Joshua and Caleb, urged, “We can do it.” But this is to misread the text, and to miss a significant point in the story: for the record informs us that eleven (not ten) brought the negative report. There was only one, Caleb, who said, “With God’s help, we can take possession of the land.” However, overnight one man, Joshua, changed his mind - and that man subsequently came to play a crucial role as Israel’s leader.

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)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.730
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.308
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