MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391842136 · doi:10.33137/wij.v19i2.42681

Women-Rabbi Fiction in the 21st Century: An Update

2024· article· en· W4391842136 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
David J. Zucker

Bibliographic record

VenueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-Journal · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoryLiteratureArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Women rabbis have been depicted in fiction for close to fifty years. In the second decade and then in the beginning of the third decade of the twenty-first century over a dozen fictional women rabbis appear as central or important characters in novels, short stories, and on the silver screen. Most of them make their first appearance. This article takes note of the authors of these works, and then looks at the characters themselves, contrasting their “fictional” experiences with the published experiences of “real-life” women rabbis. It discusses these fictional women rabbis in terms of their theology/sense of tradition; religious/educational backgrounds; gender identification; and where that information is dealt with in the storyline, how these women address some of the challenges facing women rabbis such as dressed for success; pay inequity; and matters of sexual harassment. This is followed by a section on how women regard success in the rabbinate. A caveat: the real-lived experiences of women rabbis, their definitions of success and their joys/concerns/issues/disquiets are not necessarily the subjects that concern writers of fiction that feature women rabbis as characters.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.008
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0050.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.286 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWomen in Judaism A Multidisciplinary e-JournalSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207