Bibliographic record
Abstract
An Interview of Roger White - Conducted and Edited by John S. Hatcher In 1991, well-known Bahá’í poet Roger White retired from his work at the Bahá’í World Centre because he was dying of cancer. John Hatcher had always intended to write a piece on Roger’s poetry, and suddenly aware of the brief chance he had to pose all the relevant questions to Roger about his art, Hatcher talked to Roger on the phone, recorded his responses on tape, and had the results of that Q&A transcribed. The following dialogue is the result of Hatcher’s original objective and Roger’s willingness, despite his failing health, to participate in creating what is a remarkably frank and revealing conversation. While some of the discussion involves Bahá’í terms, it provides a glimpse into the mind of a gifted poet and the struggles that he, like so many other Bahá’í artists, encountered in trying to respond to the exhortation from Bahá’u’lláh that art best serves humanity when it elevates and edifies the soul and its spiritual receptivity. Surely Roger’s poetry accomplished that objective for many Bahá’ís, and doubtless it will continue to do so well into the future.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.015 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".