MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2516380887 · doi:10.31581/jbs-18.1-4.4(2008)

Achieving Reconciliation in a Conflicting World

2008· article· en· W2516380887 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ismael Velasco

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Bahá’í Studies · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEurasian Exchange Networks
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHarmony (color)ContradictionGlobalizationFace (sociological concept)Order (exchange)SociologyPolitical sciencePolitical economyEpistemologyEnvironmental ethicsLaw and economicsSocial scienceLawEconomicsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores the dynamics of conflict—philosophical, personal, communal, and sociopolitical— against the backdrop of globalization, with a focus on religion’s role to both foster and overcome it. It argues that behind the Bahá’í principle of unity lies a “logic of reconciliation” by which we continuously seek, and continuously find, new capacity to contain paradox, transcend contradiction, and find harmony among ideas, individuals, communities, and nations. Far from denying or ignoring conflict, the Bahá’í writings push us to face it and find reconciliation. This process is an important contribution to the emergence, from the fractious present, of a sustainable and prosperous world order.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.335
Threshold uncertainty score0.449

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.181
GPT teacher head0.415
Teacher spread0.234 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations0
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Bahá’í StudiesSame topicEurasian Exchange NetworksFrench-language works237,207