MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2315268069 · doi:10.1177/0309089214551516

The Use and Abuse of Power in Amos: Identity and Ideology

2014· article· en· W2315268069 on OpenAlexaff
Daniel C. Timmer

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Sudbury
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIdeologyPower (physics)Coherence (philosophical gambling strategy)SociologyIdentity (music)Abuse of powerCriminologySocial psychologyPsychoanalysisLawPhilosophyPsychologyAestheticsPolitical sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Amos is notable for its critique of human claims to power within Israel as well as without. Intriguingly, Amos locates the resolution of such abuses in Yahweh's exercise of power as a cosmic king who eliminates some groups from among the nations and from within Israel while creating a new relationship between Yahweh and the remnants of both groups. Using an approach that gives priority to the semantic coherence of the text over its lesser diachronic features, this article explores these dynamics with attention to the criteria according to which Yahweh delivers one group and punishes another. It closes by pondering how the book of Amos itself should be subjected to ideological critique.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.044
Scholarly communication0.0080.006
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.227 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations4
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the Old TestamentSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207