MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4388990814 · doi:10.1111/rirt.14267

Christianity and Constitutionalism, NicholasAroney and IanLeigh (eds), Oxford University Press, 2022 (ISBN 978‐0‐19‐758726‐3), xii + 500 pp., pb £29.99

2023· article· en· W4388990814 on OpenAlexaff
Sotiris Mitralexis

Bibliographic record

VenueReviews in Religion and Theology · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsInstitute for Christian Studies
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConstitutionalismChristianityCitationClassicsTheologyLibrary scienceMedia studiesSociologyPhilosophyHistoryPolitical scienceLawComputer sciencePoliticsDemocracy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

and now in the coincidence-that is, in the falling together-of paradise and Kingdom.Only the Kingdom gives access to the Garden, but only the Garden renders the Kingdom thinkable.Or rather: we grasp human nature historically only through a politics, but this latter, in its turn, has no content other than paradise-which is to say, in Dante's words, 'the beatitude of this life'.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.037
Threshold uncertainty score0.124

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.005
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.008

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreReview

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 venueReviews in Religion and TheologySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207