MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Buddhism’s Growth and Popularity

2007· book-chapter· en· W4388388469 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Gurinder Singh Mann, Paul D. Numrich, R. B. Williams

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion and Society Interactions
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuddhismMeditationPopularityImmigrationRefugeeListing (finance)Baby boomersHistoryReligious studiesGender studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLawPhilosophyDemographic economicsEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Today, more Americans either practice Buddhism or express positive views about it than at any other time in U.S. history. This is largely the result of two important social trends that began in the 1960s: the ending of immigration restrictions against Asians, and the religious dissatisfactions of many Americans born after World War II. The “baby-boomers,” as they came to be called, grew into a generation of spiritual seekers. Some who had been raised as Christians or Jews sought alternative identities among the many new religious movements that sprouted in the 1960s and later, including several Buddhist groups new to the United States. A 1998 book called The Complete Guide to Buddhist America highlighted the dramatic increase in the practice of Buddhist meditation, listing nearly 1,100 meditation centers throughout the United States and Canada, ninety-eight percent of them founded since 1965 and fifty-eight percent since 1985.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.056
GPT teacher head0.349
Teacher spread0.293 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicReligion and Society InteractionsFrench-language works237,207