MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2887337929 · doi:10.7202/1050504ar

La formation d’une identité juive américaine

2018· article· fr· W2887337929 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Ira Robinson

Bibliographic record

VenueThéologiques · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesEthnologyJudaismArtPhilosophySociologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Un des développements les plus importants dans le judaïsme américain duxxesiècle est la montée du judaïsme conservateur, une interprétation américaine distincte du judaïsme rabbinique. Le processus par lequel le judaïsme conservateur a émergé dans le judaïsme américain comme un mouvement clairement distinct de l’orthodoxie — qui lui-même émerge du judaïsme traditionnel des immigrants juifs — date essentiellement de la période 1920-1950. Le présent article est une étude de l’un des incidents marquants de cette émergence : le cas du rabbin Salomon Goldman et du Jewish Center [JC] de Cleveland, Ohio. Le rabbin Goldman a été l’instigateur des changements rituels et architecturaux dans sa congrégation qui sont devenus synonymes du judaïsme conservateur mais ces changements étaient contestés par des éléments traditionalistes au sein de la synagogue. L’affaire a été devant les tribunaux et a fait sensation aux États-Unis. Cet article se fonde sur des documents d’archives récemment découverts. Il contribue à une compréhension plus nuancée de l’émergence du judaïsme conservateur de l’orthodoxie au début duxxesiècle.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.276 · 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.

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
Published2018
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThéologiquesSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207