MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2503828523 · doi:10.1057/9781137303523_3

Worlds Within Worlds: Canadian Women Religious, International Connections, Ecclesiastical Webs and the Secular State

2014· book-chapter· en· W2503828523 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Elizabeth M. Smyth

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEternityPerfectionState (computer science)SociologyGender studiesReligious communityReligious studiesHistoryTheologyAnthropologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Congregations 2 of women religious, or vowed Christian women in the Roman Catholic and Anglican traditions, can be studied as networks of women, whose numbers include educators leading lives as activists and leaders working for change. This chapter studies Canadian women religious, the first of whom arrived on the shores of North America in 1639. Outsiders (and even some insiders) accepted a stereotypical view of women religious as ‘grey women’ whose lot it was to blend into the background of the Roman Catholic Church, never to emerge as original, challenging or individual. Their habits were designed to make them appear identical and indistinguishable from one another. Some community customs included such practices as identifying their works of art and their publications as authored by ‘a member of the community’. 3 Even some foundational congregational documents, such as the Maxims of Perfection of the seventeenth-century Jesuit priest, Jean-Pierre Médaille, one of the founders of the Sisters of St Joseph, instructed its members to ‘behave in such a manner that your good actions are hidden in time and known to God alone, to appear only in eternity and even never to appear, if God so wills’. 4 Yet, as my own work and the work of current scholars of women religious demonstrates, women religious actively participated as members of networks and built community within their own congregations, across congregations and outside of the convent walls. 5 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)0.003
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 score0.145
Threshold uncertainty score0.992

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.007
Science and technology studies0.0480.019
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0120.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.239
Teacher spread0.229 · 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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207