MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3044534134 · doi:10.3138/tjt-2020-0085

Between Impact Research and Rootedness in the Community

2020· article· en· W3044534134 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Gilles Routhier

Bibliographic record

VenueToronto Journal of Theology · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicFiscal Policy and Economic Growth
Canadian institutionsUniversité Laval
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanismConstitutionRanking (information retrieval)Race (biology)SociologyKey (lock)EpistemologyWorkforceEnvironmental ethicsPhilosophyPolitical scienceTheologyLawComputer scienceGender studiesArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The race for high ranking and the search for impact risks are exhausting universities and distracting them from their original vocation. This is all the more true if we are led to eliminate all training that cannot guarantee its usefulness (understood as a contribution to growth and economic development). In this game, theology is immediately eliminated. Conceived as “useless,” it cannot manage to maintain its place in the universities, defined as a place of training for the workforce—unless we come to otherwise define the usefulness of a university discipline. Pope Francis’s proposal, in the introduction to the Apostolic Constitution Veritatis gaudium, not only argues in favour of the usefulness of theology but invites ecclesiastical studies to a radical change of paradigm if they want to play a key role in the development of a new humanism. It is this original proposal that is presented here.

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)0.026
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.037
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: Commentary · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0260.037
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0080.108
Scholarly communication0.0210.027
Open science0.0020.019
Research integrity0.0060.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.190
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.161 · 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
GenreCommentary

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
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueToronto Journal of TheologySame topicFiscal Policy and Economic GrowthFrench-language works237,207