MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2971702261 · doi:10.3138/jrpc.2017-0015

Who Was Naamah? Insights from Robert Crumb’s<i>The Book of Genesis Illustrated</i>

2019· article· en· W2971702261 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jonathan L. Friedmann

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Religion and Popular Culture · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisSisterLiteratureArtPortraitPhilosophyArt historySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Robert Crumb’s The Book of Genesis Illustrated (2009) attempts a verse-by-verse rendering of all fifty chapters of the Book of Genesis. This includes meticulous illustrations of genealogical lists and “throw-away” characters. Crumb breathes life into the passing names, giving them personalities and placing them in life situations. This article examines the single-panel portrait of Naamah (Genesis 4:22), the sister of primordial founders of human civilization. Although she is merely a name in the biblical text, Crumb makes her a proud and captivating songstress in the mould of Miriam, sister of Moses. The drawing epitomizes the role of the illustrator as an interpreter, blending elements of rabbinic exegesis with Crumb’s own interests in folk music, powerful women, and the “dimly remembered matriarchy” of biblical times.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

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 studies0.0120.014
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.205 · 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
GenreOther

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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Religion and Popular CultureSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207