Bibliographic record
Abstract
cross the 2022-2023 academic year, we in Religious Studies are celebrating the seventy-fifth anniversary of the Faculty, and now School, at McGill.At the same time, we also celebrate fifty years of the journal thereof; Arc.In this latter context, the editors have invited me to record a Director's Address, to consider the significance of this confluence of anniversaries and celebrations.Arc itself helps me to do so.The thirtieth anniversary of the Faculty of Religious Studies occasioned the publication of a special issue with a series of reflections from past Deans on the character, history, and future trajectory of the Faculty, 1 as well as H. Keith Markell's well-known volume The Faculty of Religious Studies, McGill University; 1948-78. 2 The fortieth anniversary issue of Arc, in particular, has helped me to best understand the significance of this academic year for the School, and Arc's own fiftieth anniversary.3 Both will be readily available to all very soon, as our enterprising editors, Elyse MacLeod and Amanda Rosini, digitize the entire range of Arc's publications.In the interim, I would like to note some of our predecessors' reflections, in order to suggest their current relevance, and even importance, for our understanding of our own anniversary celebrations.In this as in so many other cases at the SRS, our 1.See Arc 6, no. 1 (Autumn 1978).
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.842 | 0.723 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".