MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3011124101 · doi:10.1093/jts/flaa001

Adam and Evel: Did Satan Sleep with Eve in the Greek and Latin Lives of Adam and Eve?

2020· article· en· W3011124101 on OpenAlex
J. R. C. Cousland

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Theological Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeLiteratureArchetypeAdam and EveJudaismClassicsLatin AmericansHistoryVariety (cybernetics)ArtPhilosophyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract A variety of ancient Jewish and Christian sources refer to a sexual liaison between Satan and Eve, a union that resulted in the birth of Cain. This article assembles these texts, and then considers whether the Greek and Latin Lives of Adam and Eve are also aware of this union, and whether these texts have been influenced by the tradition of the Watchers sleeping with the daughters of men. While scholars have been divided on these issues for the last century, this article determines that the Greek Life does not allude or refer to any sexual liaison. The Latin Vita (perhaps in dependence on a different archetype) could allow for the notion, but it is only Latin P that uses language pointing to a literal sexual union. These findings suggest that the Greek and Latin lives did not originally contain a sexual seduction of Eve by the devil. It was only latterly that the narratives were influenced by the Watchers’ narrative or attempts to account for Cain’s maleficent nature.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.371

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.179 · 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