MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2494120874 · doi:10.1057/9781137485496_5

The Spirit’s Utility: Expressed Functionalism and APCC’s Future

2015· book-chapter· en· W2494120874 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Aechtner

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooks · 2015
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPentecostalism and Christianity Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAppealFunctionalism (philosophy of mind)TypologySkepticismPsychologySocial psychologyPolitical scienceSociologyEpistemologyLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A pronounced concern with the utility of Pentecostal beliefs and practices emerges as a central theme in the analysis of APCC. After briefly examining functionalism and religion, this chapter provides a summary typology of APCC’s apparent functions, including Corporate Utility; Religio-Cultural Appeal and Preservation; Reality Maintenance; Identity Formation; Socioeconomic Action; and, Coping Mechanisms. Following this review, the chapter then concludes by noting congregant opinions regarding the future of APCC. Some members envisaged that many people from outside of the diaspora will eventually join the church, while others were skeptical of APCC’s appeal to non-Africans. Nonetheless, despite these varied outlooks, parishioners unanimously declared that the church will, in some way, positively influence Canadian society with its non-Western form of Pentecostalism. These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.034

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.012
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.229
Teacher spread0.183 · 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

Citations0
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan US eBooksSame topicPentecostalism and Christianity StudiesFrench-language works237,207