Review: <i>Saints Under Siege: The Texas State Raid on the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints</i>, by Stuart A. Wright and James T. Richardson
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Book Review| May 01 2013 Review: Saints Under Siege: The Texas State Raid on the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, by Stuart A. Wright and James T. Richardson Saints Under Siege: The Texas State Raid on the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints. Edited by Stuart A. Wright and James T. Richardson. New York University Press, 2011. 270 pages. $80.00 cloth, $25.00 paper. Lori G. Beaman Lori G. Beaman 1University Of Ottawa Search for other works by this author on: This Site PubMed Google Scholar Nova Religio (2013) 16 (4): 148–149. https://doi.org/10.1525/nr.2013.16.4.148 Views Icon Views Article contents Figures & tables Video Audio Supplementary Data Peer Review Share Icon Share Facebook Twitter LinkedIn MailTo Tools Icon Tools Get Permissions Cite Icon Cite Search Site Citation Lori G. Beaman; Review: Saints Under Siege: The Texas State Raid on the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints, by Stuart A. Wright and James T. Richardson. Nova Religio 1 May 2013; 16 (4): 148–149. doi: https://doi.org/10.1525/nr.2013.16.4.148 Download citation file: Ris (Zotero) Reference Manager EasyBib Bookends Mendeley Papers EndNote RefWorks BibTex toolbar search Search Dropdown Menu toolbar search search input Search input auto suggest filter your search All ContentNova Religio Search This content is only available via PDF. © 2013 by The Regents of the University of California2013 Article PDF first page preview Close Modal You do not currently have access to this content.
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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".