MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392327316 · doi:10.51644/9780889207738-fm

Front Matter

2013· paratext· en· W4392327316 on OpenAlexafffund

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeparatext
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicTheological Perspectives and Practices
Canadian institutionsUniversity of WindsorECW Press (Canada)
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsFront (military)PhysicsMeteorology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Rarely has an author illuminated in one book an aspect of religious study with attention to so many disciplines. John Hoffman skillfully interrelates the fields of psychology, mythology, anthropology, literature, and New Testament studies to show their common use of narration techniques. Hoffman explains how the storytelling nature of myths, parables, and psychotherapy seeks to heal and to bring wholeness to both the individual and to a social grouping.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.137
Threshold uncertainty score0.195

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0050.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.8630.788

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.358
Teacher spread0.321 · 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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicTheological Perspectives and PracticesFrench-language works237,207