MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3022149299 · doi:10.1515/9781846150975

King James I and the Religious Culture of England

2000· book· en· W3022149299 on OpenAlexaff
James Doelman

Bibliographic record

VenueBoydell and Brewer eBooks · 2000
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoetryPoliticsGeorge (robot)NarrativeReligious controversiesReignFaithLiteratureHistoryIconographyArtReligious studiesClassicsTheologyArt historyPhilosophyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Examination of the influence of James I on the religious and cultural life of England. James I and the Religious Culture of England is a study of King James's influence, both direct and indirect, on various aspects of religious life in England during his reign; James emerges as more interested in religious matters than in any other aspect of English culture. It brings together literary, religious and political history to consider such topics as the poetic response to James's accession, prophetic poetry at court, the neo-Latin religious epigram, the politics of conversion, and the biblical iconography of peace-making applied to James; the short devotional lyric, religious narrative, philosophical or theological verse, works of religious satire and controversy,liturgical verse, and sermons are all examined, and relatively unstudied writers such as John Davies of Hereford, Joshua Sylvester, Andrew Melville, Joseph Hall, George Wither. Professor JAMES DOELMAN teaches in the Department of English at McMaster University.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.063
Threshold uncertainty score0.125

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations40
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBoydell and Brewer eBooksSame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207