MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3111201273

Benjamin Franklin’s Comic Critique of Religious Controversy

2020· article· en· W3111201273 on OpenAlex
Geoffrey C. Kellow

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 Political Science Reviewer · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHoaxComicsCharacter (mathematics)PoliticsLiteratureReligious beliefReligious studiesPhilosophySociologyHistoryAestheticsArtLawEpistemologyPolitical science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores Benjamin Franklin’s use of satire, parody and literary hoax to address the relationship between religion and politics.  In using humour and an occasionally more caustic wit, Franklin meant to prompt in his readers an awareness of the character and substance of religion and religious controversy.  Considering the latter, Franklin deployed comic anecdotes to draw a distinction between the essential and epiphenomenal elements of religious belief, an exercise predicated on the assumption of a deep concordance across denominations and faiths regarding the essence of religion.  Franklin found in humour a means to bound religion, drawing out a salutary space and a common religious core for both citizens and society.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.953
Threshold uncertainty score0.993

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.009
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 head0.029
GPT teacher head0.353
Teacher spread0.324 · 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