MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4244826033 · doi:10.26443/jcreor.v1i0.3

From the Editors

2019· article· en· W4244826033 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Gerbern S. Oegema

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the Council for Research on Religion · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTheme (computing)Library scienceDisciplineSociologyMedia studiesThe artsResearch councilPolitical scienceLawSocial sciencePhilosophyGovernment (linguistics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Montreal, December 2019 Dear Readers: The Council for Research on Religion (CREOR) is pleased to announce the first edition of its E-Journal, The Journal of the Council for Research on Religion. This first issue deals with the theme of “Religion and Violence,” a SSHRC funded colloquium that took place on April 17th - 20th, 2018. The colloquium was a collaboration between members of McGill and Concordia University, further details concerning the colloquium can be found on the following site: https://creorgraduate.wordpress.com/religion-and-violence-colloquium/CREOR is Montreal's first academic research council in the field of Religious Studies. The Council is an inter-disciplinary and inter-university entity drawing on the expertise and research interests present in the city of Montreal. It consists of members from the disciplines of Religious Studies and other disciplines within Arts, as well as from Education, Law and Medicine, and other disciplines, such as Management and Music. CREOR is based in Montreal and collaborates with researchers from Montreal based universities and colleges and from around the world. Editorial Team for the Religion and Violence Vol. 1Chief Editors: Dr. Gerbern S. Oegema Dr. André Gagné Graduate Student Editors: Amanda Rosini Elyse MacLeod David Anthony Basham

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 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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.429
Threshold uncertainty score0.717

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.248
GPT teacher head0.458
Teacher spread0.210 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the Council for Research on ReligionSame topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207