The interdependence of mobility and faith–an introduction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The introduction to the special issue draws together theoretical and analytical strands that run through the four papers. As the four papers illustrate, devotion and mobility, belief and trajectory, go hand in hand. The main argument is that the religious movements discussed in this special issue are not local phenomena attempting to transcend fixed boundaries: they are transcendence, in the sense that they always are (and have been) part of the border land between global and vernacular, modern and traditional. They are not at the border: they are the border. Concepts such as mobility, postcoloniality and translocality are being discussed, which in turn lead to a problematization of concepts such as “Africa” and “Diaspora”. A second strand that combines the various papers is that trajectories along which religious practitioners travel are not nicely established routes, rather these are constantly “interrupted”; travellers move between localities, hopping from one hub to another. Such an approach allows a focus on networks and concrete interactions; and it destabilizes the assumed homogenous tracts along which Africans (or Pentecostalists) venture into the world “out there”.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".