MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2179855090 · doi:10.1163/15685330-12301227

Saul the Levite and His Concubine: The “Allusive” Quality of Judges 19

2015· article· en· W2179855090 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

VenueVetus Testamentum · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJewish studiesHebrew BibleBiblical studiesQuality (philosophy)Composition (language)Identity (music)Point (geometry)PhilosophyLiteratureTheologyArtEpistemologyAestheticsJudaismMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It is without question that Judges 19 manifests an overt anti-Saul, pro-David bias, with a number of references (e.g., Gibeah; Bethlehem; Jebus; the dismembered concubine) that point clearly to each figure. At the same time, it features a handful of markers that elude easy explanation. These include the Levitical identity of the protagonist, the adulterous concubine, the reference to Ramah, the destination of “the House of Yahweh,” and the Ephraimite host. Rather than view these details as either secondary or unrelated to Saul, I propose that they also represent tools in service of the overarching anti-Saul polemic. More specifically, these markers reflect awareness of a Saul-based version of 1 Samuel 1-2. This proposal in turn sheds light on questions regarding the composition and transmission of a separate Saul complex.

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.589
Threshold uncertainty score0.281

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.118
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.186 · 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