MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3134768189 · doi:10.5508/jhs.2014.v14.a6

Vetting the Priest in Zechariah 3: The Satan between Divine and Achaemenid Administrations

2014· article· en· W3134768189 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jason M. Silverman

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Hebrew Scriptures · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyVettingHubrisPersianLoyaltyZoroastrianismPoliticsLiteratureTheologyLawPolitical scienceIslamArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article argues the Satan in Zech 3 was modeled on Achaemenid imperial structure. First, the term in the Hebrew Bible is discussed. Second, a brief overview of Achaemenid offices and loyalty ceremonies is given. These are applied to Zech 3 and the Satan, arguing that the vision is a heavenly version of satrapal confirmation of priests. The article concludes by discussing imperial and theological hubris, arguing that Zech 3 is an instance of political Persian, rather than “Zoroastrian,” influence.

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)0.001
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.025

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.016
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.214
Teacher spread0.188 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Hebrew ScripturesSame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207