MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2491826479 · doi:10.1017/chol9780521764407.033

Gregory of Nazianzus

2000· book-chapter· en· W2491826479 on OpenAlexaff
John A. McGuckin

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyChristianityPeriod (music)TheologyLiteratureArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Of all the writers of the earlier period, Gregory of Nazianzus was the one the later Byzantines turned to with most respect for his combination of high style, theological acumen, and philosophical 'sobriety'. Gregory was, as priest and philosopher, concerned with a Christian account of the nature of the First Principle. Gregory is not only the supreme articulator of the hypostatic relations of the Father and Son, but he is one of the most influential theoreticians of the Trinity in all Greek patristic writing. In other words his vision of the Supreme Monad is complex and rich. He is seeking to address both common Christians, who embraced Trinitarian acclamations in their liturgical doxologies, as well as sophisticated religious philosophers of his day and this with a view to facilitating the attraction of the literate pagan upper classes into Christianity at the imperial capital, where a large body of thinkers still required convincing of the intellectual respectability of the new religion.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.054

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.006

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.177
Teacher spread0.141 · 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

Citations16
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicHistorical, Religious, and Philosophical StudiesFrench-language works237,207