MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Religious Confessions and the Sciences in the Sixteenth Century

2015· article· en· W2730805534 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jürgen Helm, Annette Winkelmann, James Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Philosophy and Science
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophySociologyReligious studiesHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Religious Confessions and the Sciences in the Sixteenth Century, the proceedings of a conference held in 1998 at the Wittenberg Leucorea Foundation, is a welcome addition to the growing literature on religion and science.It presents eleven diverse case studies, each focusing on a different example of the interaction between religion and science in the 16th century.Section 1, 'Christian Confessions and the Sciences', focuses on Lutheran, Calvinist, and Jesuit developments in Germany and Royal Prussia.Section 2, 'Ways of Transmission', examines the Jewish role in the transmission of science in Italy and the Ottoman Empire after the expulsion of the Jews from Spain in 1492.Section 3, 'Judaism between Tradition and Scientific Discoveries', considers Jewish developments primarily in Italy.It also includes a brief essay on the Maharal of Prague and a more synthetic article on the history of geography in Jewish sources.According to the editors of the volume, the purpose of the conference was to present a very wide perspective on the impact of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation on scientific developments.This wide perspective has in fact produced an extraordinary range of subjects.In this slim volume of 161 pages, the essays range from Germany and Prussia to Italy and the Ottoman Empire, from Lutherans and Calvinists to Jesuits and Jews.There is also a great variety in subjects broached and methods employed.Thus, the fields covered include physics, psychology, anatomy, mathematics, music, mineralogy, astronomy, and geography; and the individual chapters draw on the methods of the history of philosophy and science, the history of ideas, the sociology of science, the history of scientific institutions, intellectual and cultural history, source criticism and the study of influence.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0050.017
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0000.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.193
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.119 · 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.

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

Citations7
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAestimatio Sources and Studies in the History of ScienceSame topicHistorical Philosophy and ScienceFrench-language works237,207