MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311515316 · doi:10.1177/03090892221116917

On the tedious and monotonous repetitions in the Tabernacle accounts: a reassessment

2022· article· en· W4311515316 on OpenAlexaff
Albert D. Friedberg, Juni Hoppe

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Study of the Old Testament · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeIdeologyScholarshipReading (process)LiteratureHistoryTorahPhilosophyLinguisticsArtLawArchaeologyJudaismPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Modern scholarship and medieval commentators have generally viewed the execution of the Tabernacle and the priestly ordination described in Exodus 35–40 and Leviticus 8 as the fulfilment of the earlier commands contained in Exodus 25–31, following the command-fulfilment pattern that is so common in priestly writings. We challenge this reading and conclude, on form, thematic, and narrative considerations, that we are in the presence of two alternate versions and that the skillful placement of the second version harmonizes these versions and creates a novel and largely ignored account. Priestly versions, when read in isolation, could have presented two competing (ideological) depictions of the Tabernacle.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

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 studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.237 · 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.

Study designQualitative
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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Study of the Old TestamentSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207