MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Presbyterian Confessions

2019· reference-entry· en· W4253258745 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Donald K. McKim

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereference-entry
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConfession (law)FaithProtestantismTheologyTheme (computing)MethodismReligious studiesHistoryLawPhilosophyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Presbyterians have expressed the Reformed theological tradition’s emphasis on the need to confess Christian faith. Confessions of faith have been a hallmark of Presbyterian churches throughout the world and throughout their history. Some confessions have presented a full range of theological topics; others have focused on particular issues addressed from Reformed perspectives. Presbyterians have built on classic continental Reformed confessions composed during the sixteenth-century Protestant Reformation. The Westminster Confession of Faith (1647), composed in part by Presbyterians during the English Civil War, has been one of the most influential and enduring confessions, especially in the United States, where it has been the doctrinal standard of many Presbyterian denominations. A Book of Confessions, including a number of classical and contemporary Reformed confessions, is the doctrinal standard of the Presbyterian Church in the United States of America. It includes the Confession of 1967 centered on the theme of reconciliation in Jesus Christ. Other important confessions from Presbyterian churches have emerged in Canada, the Republic of Korea, the Presbyterian-Reformed Church in Cuba, and other nations. New and ongoing confessions of faith by Presbyterians express the Reformed impulse—“I believe, therefore I confess.”

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.013
Scholarly communication0.0050.005
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.302 · 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
GenreOther

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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics→French-language works237,207→