MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210291004 · doi:10.31581/jbs-10.1-2.447(2000)

Image of the Mystic Flower

2000· article· en· W4210291004 on OpenAlex

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Bahá’í Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicJungian Analytical Psychology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWorshipSymbol (formal)MysticismSituatedIndian subcontinentAestheticsLiteratureHistoryArtVisual artsPhilosophyAncient historyTheologyLinguisticsComputer scienceArtificial intelligence

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The most recently constructed Bahá’í House of Worship, situated in Bahapur, India, was dedicated in December 1985. The attractive and compelling design of this building creates the visual effect of a large, white lotus blossomappearing to emerge from the pools of water circled around it. The lotus flower, identified by the psychiatrist Carl Jung as an archetypal symbol, carries with it many meanings. This article will explore these meanings both in the traditions of the Indian subcontinent and in other cultures and other eras. In addition, the article will show that the flower imagery relates also to symbols employed in the Bahá’í Writings and, while reiterating the meanings of the past, also functions as a powerful image announcing the appearance of Bahá’u’lláh, the Manifestation of God for this day.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.732
Threshold uncertainty score0.997

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.342 · 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