MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2172435466 · doi:10.1111/lic3.12260

Toward a Postsecular Eighteenth Century

2015· article· en· W2172435466 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

VenueLiterature Compass · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of AlbertaWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSecularizationScholarshipNorm (philosophy)SociologyEpistemologyWork (physics)PhilosophyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The twenty‐first‐century “turns” to religion, to theology, and to postsecularity have challenged the central tenets of the secularization thesis, even at times proclaiming its end. But scholarship on eighteenth‐century British literature has not taken up – whether to defend or delegitimize secularization as fact or norm – the challenges posed by these developments as often as other fields. This essay discusses why this might be so, and it points to work, and avenues for work, that might prove fruitful in reevaluating the secularization thesis. It argues that eighteenth‐century literary critics should address the concerns and methods of postsecularism and that we have a special role to play in this area of scholarship.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.909
Threshold uncertainty score0.364

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.284 · 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