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 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 categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.607
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

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 studies0.0020.000
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 head0.025
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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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