MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3091868280 · doi:10.35632/ajis.v22i1.1726

With Reverence for the Word

2005· article· en· W3091868280 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Aisha Geissinger

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Islam and Society · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisJudaismChristianityReverenceFaithContext (archaeology)IslamLiteratureHistorySubject (documents)Variety (cybernetics)Interpretation (philosophy)ClassicsReligious studiesPhilosophyArtTheologyEpistemologyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This ground-breaking work is a collection of papers originally given at anacademic conference on the interpretation of scripture in medieval Judaism,Christianity, and Islam, which was held at the University of Toronto in1997. Of equal interest to scholars and students of medieval Judaism,Christianity, and Islam, particularly those concerned with the place of thescriptures in these religious traditions, it demonstrates both the diversitywithin these three faiths’ exegetical traditions as well as their many crossculturalsimilarities.Following a short preface, which briefly outlines the work’s purposesand scope, the book is divided into three sections, each of which containsthe chapters related to each faith tradition. Each section begins with itsown introduction to the history and methods of the medieval exegesis ofthe relevant faith tradition, which provides the non-specialist reader witha historical context in which to place the individual chapters. The introductionsalso draw the reader’s attention to some parallel developmentsand possible interfaith influences among these exegetical traditions,while at the same time promoting a nuanced understanding in order toavoid facile comparisons. The book contains both a general subject indexand an index to citations from the Bible, Rabbinic literature, and theQur’an.Part 1, which contains 10 chapters on medieval Jewish exegesis, isarguably the most vibrant portion of this book. It conveys a sense of thedepth and breadth of this exegetical tradition, as well as the variety ofapproaches that are being used to study it, and the potential such studieshave for shedding light on a variety of historical issues ...

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.133
Threshold uncertainty score0.444

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0030.010
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.1330.120

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.231
Teacher spread0.217 · 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

Citations0
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Islam and SocietySame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207