MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385278345 · doi:10.1177/1476993x231185789

A History of Research on the Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls

2023· article· en· W4385278345 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Robert E. Jones

Bibliographic record

VenueCurrents in Biblical Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicBiblical Studies and Interpretation
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research CouncilPennsylvania State University
KeywordsDead Sea ScrollsPeriod (music)Second Temple periodLiteratureHistoryJudaismEpigraphyJewish historyBiblical studiesClassicsAncient historyJewish studiesArtHebrew BibleArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Aramaic Dead Sea Scrolls have attracted increasing scholarly attention since their official publication was completed in 2009. These manuscripts, representing about thirty distinct compositions, attest to the existence of a previously unknown Jewish Aramaic scribal culture that flourished in the early Hellenistic period (ca. late fourth to mid-second centuries BCE). The Aramaic Scrolls thus have the potential to illuminate an otherwise poorly understood period of Jewish history. In this article, I discuss the various scholarly approaches to their language, literary content, and social location, with a special emphasis on trends in the secondary literature since the late 2000s. This article will also provide interested students and scholars with an overview of the major themes and concerns found throughout the Aramaic Scrolls.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0060.008
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.575
GPT teacher head0.494
Teacher spread0.081 · 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
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 venueCurrents in Biblical ResearchSame topicBiblical Studies and InterpretationFrench-language works237,207