MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2735502087 · doi:10.1177/0091829615590889

Pub congregations, coffee house communities, tall-steeple churches, and sacred space: The missional church movement and architecture

2015· article· en· W2735502087 on OpenAlex
Allan Effa

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueMissiology An International Review · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsTaylor College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEcclesiologyArchitectureSpace (punctuation)SociologyConversationAestheticsArtEucharistMedia studiesVisual artsArt historyLawPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Some popular missional church literature portrays the institutional church as a stale and mostly unattractive entity focused on maintaining its programs and buildings and increasingly unable to reach a secular society. Rather than reform or reboot church in its present structure, new missional communities need to be established in places where unchurched people are comfortable gathering. This article examines some of these assumptions in conversation with some of the critics of the missional church literature. It calls for a robust ecclesiology that takes into account the rich historical heritage of the church and the role aesthetics and rituals play in the formation of authentic missional communities.

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.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.209
Threshold uncertainty score0.395

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.294 · 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