MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4312468175 · doi:10.25071/0848-1563.39739

Bridging Divides between Theological Studies and Feminist Studies

2020· article· en· W4312468175 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Che-Wen Cindy Lin

Bibliographic record

VenueHistorical Papers · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Society, and Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBridging (networking)SociologyTheologyPhilosophyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

While feminists within the field of gender studies challenge the capitalism, patriarchy, and colonialism that they identify in the field of theological studies, theologians argue that approaches such as Marxist feminism cannot be applied to theological teaching principles. As a result, these two academic fields are treated as mutually exclusive. In order to bridge the divide between these two disciplines, this paper engages in an interdisciplinary study between theological and feminist studies. I intend to conduct archival and library research on the overlap between Christian missionary history and Chinese and Japanese women's history. Evidence of this overlap can be found in the memorandum The Story of Canadian Methodist Women Missionaries published by Toyo Eiwa Girls' Academy in 2010 in memory of Methodist women's missionary work in Japan. Annual reports housed in the United Church Archives clearly document the history of how Canadian home missions rescued Chinese slave girls and received Japanese picture brides upon their arrival in Canada, and of how Canadian foreign missions spread Christian teaching abroad. In contrast, Tani E. Barlow -a Chinese feminist critic -in The Question of Women in Chinese Feminism, explores the history of Chinese feminism and its connection with Japanese and western feminism. In

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.474
Threshold uncertainty score0.691

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.134
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.215 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHistorical PapersSame topicReligion, Society, and DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207