MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2326499546 · doi:10.1558/ptcs.v13i2.217

"Catch the Fire"

2014· article· en· W2326499546 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mark J. Cartledge

Bibliographic record

VenuePentecoStudies · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBlessingSpiritualityPilgrimageNarrativeCatharsisScholarshipGlobal networkGlobal cityIdentity (music)WorshipHistorySociologyRelevance (law)Media studiesPolitical scienceAestheticsArtLawAncient historyTelecommunicationsArchaeologyLiteratureEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper revisits the scholarship associated with the so-called Toronto Blessing. Since the revival meetings associated with the Toronto Blessing in the mid 1990s, the church has developed from a single congregation into a network of churches with centres in a number of cities around the world. The network is called “Catch the Fire” and propagates revivalist Pentecostalist spirituality. Leaders from the network have allied themselves with others also advancing revivalism from North America and beyond. This global relational network of churches and ministries is called “Partners in Harvest”. The paper aims to describe and interpret the narrative that is central to this global network of churches and which sustains spiritual identity and global relevance. In particular, it considers the Toronto church as a centre of revivalist spirituality, providing a continued place of centripetal pilgrimage, personal catharsis, as well as centrifugal global 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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.651

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.022
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.190 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations3
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePentecoStudiesSame topicPentecostalism and Christianity StudiesFrench-language works237,207