MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2116210297 · doi:10.1177/0309089206068841

Safekeeping, Borrowing, and Rental

2006· article· en· W2116210297 on OpenAlexaff
David L. Baker

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal principles and applications
Canadian institutionsTyndale University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRentingPaymentLawProperty (philosophy)Old TestamentBusinessHistorySociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyFinanceArchaeologyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In general, a person who is entrusted with someone else’s property—whether for safekeeping, borrowing, or rental—is expected to take good care of it. On the basis of this assumption, provisions are made in various ancient law collections for dealing with problems that may arise: for example, the loss or damage of such property. This article examines the laws on care of other people’s property in the ancient Near East and the Old Testament, especially Exod. 22.7-15 (Heb. 22.6-14), showing that they have much in common, but also that there are significant differences. One particular feature of biblical law which distinguishes it from other ancient (and modern) laws is its emphasis on borrowing, without payment, rather than rental. This may be compared with the laws on interest-free loans in the Old Testament, which are also unique in the ancient Near East.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.027
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.326
Teacher spread0.301 · 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
GenreOther

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 venueJournal for the Study of the Old TestamentSame topicLegal principles and applicationsFrench-language works237,207