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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a thought-provoking book. It is O’Leary’s contention that Platonism and the Bible (and, indeed, philosophy and theology generally) are distinct and cannot be synthesized. It is only when the tensions between the two are recognized and perceived in the works of the Fathers that those works can be read aright. In this, he pits himself against those such as Lewis Ayres, who, in Nicea and its Legacy, maintains that Platonism was an aid to the development of Christian thought in the patristic period, and those such as Mark Edwards, who minimizes both the dichotomy between Judaism and Hellenism in Palestine at the time of Christ and the influence of Platonism on Origen’s thought. Drawing on Harnack and Heidegger, O’Leary argues that a proper hermeneutics of past Christian thought will not flinch from recognizing the historically conditioned nature of the development of doctrine but rather will embrace it. Only thus can the texts of the Christian tradition as a whole, not just those of the patristic period, be fully appreciated for what they can teach us.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it