MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2904052432

What is God? A Spiritual Science approach

2018· article· en· W2904052432 on OpenAlexaff
Raul Valverde

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicParanormal Experiences and Beliefs
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanityEpistemologyMetaphysicsConsciousnessMerge (version control)MeditationGlobePhilosophyPsychologyComputer scienceTheology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Spiritual scientists make an effort to merge science and religion. As humanity becomes more evolved and is in the search of a paradigm that helps to reconcile science and religion, spiritual science has the potential to start to spread around the globe and become the new paradigm for the man of the future that does not longer need organized religions but only support and guidance to discover the God within. The discovery of God is a personal matter that requires more than a life time, however, it is the final goal of man to become unified with God. Spiritual science uses concepts from different fields including metaphysics, quantum physics, and parapsychology into a unified system that describes the multi-dimensional nature of man and the universe. The article proposes quantum physics as a possible answer to the scientific explanation of God’s living within our consciousness and presents the spiritual science paradigm as a scientific method for the understanding of God.

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)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.039
Scholarly communication0.0050.007
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.293 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)Same topicParanormal Experiences and BeliefsFrench-language works237,207