MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2890956949 · doi:10.31581/jbs-3.3.5(1991)

End of the World: Whatever Happened?

2018· article· en· W2890956949 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Ross Woodman

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Bahá’í Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNuclear Issues and Defense
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEschatologyRevelationPhilosophyHegelianismMeaning (existential)Context (archaeology)ConsciousnessReading (process)LiteratureTheologyArtHistoryEpistemologyArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh announcing at once the end of the world and the birth of a new creation is located in a nineteenth-century setting, surrounded by the eschatology of Hegel at its beginning and the eschatology of Nietzsche at its end, the unique station of the Manifestation of God and the meaning of Revelation becomes clear. By contrasting the eschatology of Bahá’u’lláh with that of Hegel and Nietzsche, this article attempts to locate and explore in the prophetic context of resurrection and return as interpreted by Bahá’u’lláh in, for example, the Kitáb-iÍqán, the spiritual origins of the planetary consciousness upon which the survival of humankind and the globe itself now depends. Primary emphasis in locating and exploring these origins is placed upon a close reading of Bahá’u’lláh’s Tablet, “The Divine Springtime is come, O Most Exalted Pen...”

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.019
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.365
Teacher spread0.315 · 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 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Bahá’í StudiesSame topicNuclear Issues and DefenseFrench-language works237,207