MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3010668051 · doi:10.4103/ijnpnd.ijnpnd_76_19

Neurotheology—The Triad of Religion, Spirituality, and Neuroscience

2020· article· en· W3010668051 on OpenAlexaff
Saleem Al-Nuaimi, Musthafa Mohamed Essa, M. Walid Qoronfleh

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of Nutrition Pharmacology Neurological Diseases · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Spirituality, and Psychology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSpiritualitySecularizationTriad (sociology)PsychologyMental healthBridge (graph theory)PsychotherapistPsychoanalysisMedicinePhilosophyAlternative medicineReligious studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Religion and spirituality are fundamental to the human condition and play a role in our mental health and wellbeing. Initially, religion and science thrived in a complimentary relationship, only to be polarized with the aggressive secularization of science. Neurotheology is an exciting new approach that may help bridge our understandings of religion, health and the overall human condition. However, we need to recognize the limitations of this approach and, hence, cautiously interpret any findings.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.230
Threshold uncertainty score0.626

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.059
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations4
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of Nutrition Pharmacology Neurological DiseasesSame topicReligion, Spirituality, and PsychologyFrench-language works237,207