MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3139841415

Book Review of Tamara Neuman, Settling Hebron: Jewish Fundamentalism in a Palestinian City

2020· article· en· W3139841415 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raphael Cohen‐Almagor

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJudaismIdeologyFundamentalismHuman settlementEthnographyAmbivalenceQuarter (Canadian coin)Gender studiesHistorySociologyAncient historyReligious studiesLawPolitical scienceAnthropologyArchaeologyPhilosophyPoliticsPsychoanalysisPsychology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tamara Neuman has been researching Jewish ideological settlements for many years. She started her research in 1994, after the signing of the Oslo Accords. In Settling Hebron, Neuman presents the first critical ethnography of the Jewish settler populations in Kiryat Arba and the adjacent Jewish Quarter in the Old City of Hebron. This ethnography illustrates the changes that distinguish and define ideological settlements. Neuman examines how religion functions as ideology in the Palestinian city of Hebron, with a focus on Jewish settler expansion and its close but ambivalent relationship to the Israeli state. Through extensive fieldwork, interviews with settlers, soldiers, Palestinian residents as well as archival research, Neuman provides a fascinating and often disturbing account of a tense, abnormal co-existence between Palestinians and Jews in an occupied territory, populated mostly by Palestinians yet administered by Israeli soldiers.

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.266 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSSRN Electronic JournalSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207