MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2773101059 · doi:10.46525/ret.v18i2.485

O ensinamento ético da Primeira Carta de João: Crer e amar - Crer no amor

2016· article· pt· W2773101059 on OpenAlexaff
Ney Brasil Pereira, Johan Konings

Bibliographic record

VenueRevista Encontros Teológicos · 2016
Typearticle
Languagept
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious and Theological Studies
Canadian institutionsDiscovery Air (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Os autores partem do fato de que, se o quarto evangelhose distingue pelo seu caráter querigmático, a primeira cartade João é caracterizada pelo seu tom parenético,exortativo, prático. É rica, portanto, em “ensinamento ético”.Nela, o Discípulo Amado insiste na dupla atitudefundamental que deve caracterizar seus “filhinhos”: a fé,precisamente a fé cristológica, e o amor, o amor fraterno.Mas que “amor”? Não o amor-unificação mística dognosticismo, mas antes o amor-engajamento da tradiçãobíblica. É nesta perspectiva que os autores elencam osindícios para a ética cristã, que aparecem na carta,fazendo-o de duas maneiras: percorrendo os blocostemáticos dos seus cinco capítulos, e destacando os temasneles predominantes.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.573
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.003

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.274 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevista Encontros TeológicosSame topicReligious and Theological StudiesFrench-language works237,207