MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188739135

The Catholic Situation in North America: Magnificent Opportunity, Breath-taking Responsibility

2007· article· en· W2188739135 on OpenAlexaffabout
Reginald W. Bibby

Bibliographic record

VenueMISSION · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiscernmentCivilitySpiritualityDiversity (politics)SociologyChurch attendanceIndividualismIdentification (biology)AttendanceEnvironmental ethicsGender studiesPolitical scienceLawReligiosityEpistemologyAnthropology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, the author focuses on Catholic and social trends in North America and some of implications of those trends for evangelization and mission. He begins by examining Roman Catholic trends regarding identification, attendance, belief, and receptivity. He then looks at ten social trends that have characterized Canada since the 1960s, trends which he suggests are also applicable to varying degrees to the United States. Six of the trends involve significant shifts in the direction of greater levels of diversity, individualism, discernment, gratification, time expectations, and information. Four additional trends, he maintains, point to important continuities regarding what people want, civility, family life, and religion/spirituality. He concludes with a brief discussion of three major implications and some of the related challenges that the Catholic Church faces as it attempts to engage in more effective evangelization and mission.

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)0.002
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.057
Threshold uncertainty score0.113

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.007
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
GenreCommentary

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

Citations2
Published2007
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMISSIONSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207