Bibliographic record
Abstract
et me begin, first, by thanking the organizers for inviting me to speak.Second, I must apologize for departing from my initial intention, which was to revisit "classic" popular histories which have shaped much of the discussion surrounding what one might call "revolutionary Christianity" in the medieval and modem periods.I was thinking at the time of Norman Cohn's The Pursuit of the Millennium and Christopher Hill's The World Turned Upside Down, both of which were indeed very much invitations to look back in wonder.1 Third, I' d like to commend the organizers on their stimulating conference brief, one which so effectively diverted me from my plan as advertised.I'll therefore begin with an attempt to engage more or less directly with the brief.In particular, there are two points from the brief which captured my attention from the outset.First, there is the indication that many casual observers tend to consider something called "religion" to be the very antithesis of something called "revolution."In the conventional language of many revolutionary projects, religion is thus a "counter-revolutionary" force.It is unclear to me whether this formulation indicates a conceptualtheoretical relation, in which religion and revolution coexist dialectically.Or, whether it indicates a historical-political relation, in which religion regularly inhibits radical social transformations.In either case, it is clear that it is fairly easy to poke holes in such general conceptions, either by means of any number and kind of case studies, or by means of a representation of revolutionary ideologies or practices as quasi-religious, of "revolution 1.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.134 | 0.054 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".