Bibliographic record
Abstract
Burton Mack’s Myth of Innocence delves into the nebulous territory of earliest Christianities with a reformer’s zeal and an academic’s rigour. Confronting a paucity of primary documentation and a scholarly obsession over the historical Jesus, Mack attempts to change the popular and academic vision of Christian origins with what he describes as “a single shift in perspective”: looking at the Gospel of Mark not to study the indelible uniqueness of the Christ Event, but to uncover the social histories of the document and its existence as a social charter.1 Thus, Mack turns to social-historical methodology (and nuanced literary criticism) in order to elucidate the social traditions and interests underpinning the Gospel of Mark,2 and to illustrate how the gospel’s careful craftsmanship informs scholarly and Church traditions of Christianity’s novel origins. Mack argues that Mark’s gospel was a charter document for his community, functioning as an authorizing defence amidst c.70 CE social upheaval, persecution, and perceptions of failure.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.045 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".