MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4313897458 · doi:10.1163/15700682-bja10097

Burton Mack’s Challenge to the Study of Religion

2023· article· en· W4313897458 on OpenAlexaff
Willi Braun

Bibliographic record

VenueMethod & Theory in the Study of Religion · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicStudy and Philosophy of Religion
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMythologyChristianityPhilosophyReligious studiesEpistemologySociologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Burton Mack was the most influential and, perhaps, controversial scholar of the Christian bible and Christian origins of his generation. He exposed the conventional story of Christian origins as a myth that needed to be studied not on its own terms but in terms of a general theory of religion that would be useful also in the study of religions other than Christianity. This article provides a brief summary of the main features of Mack’s work for readers who are not familiar with it. Its purpose is also to be a setup for a set of essays that engage Mack in their own areas of specialization in the study of religion.

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)0.006
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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.030

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.026
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0030.007
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 head0.067
GPT teacher head0.332
Teacher spread0.265 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMethod & Theory in the Study of ReligionSame topicStudy and Philosophy of ReligionFrench-language works237,207