MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399691377 · doi:10.1163/18748945-bja10096

On Hosting, Pilgrimage and “Indirect Mission”

2024· article· en· W4399691377 on OpenAlexaff
Simon Coleman

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Sciences and Missions · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligious Tourism and Spaces
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPilgrimageHistory of religionsEthnographyAction (physics)Intervention (counseling)Focus (optics)PopulationSociologyHeresyHistoryReligious studiesPolitical scienceLawAncient historyAnthropologyPhilosophyArchaeologyDemographyPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This paper brings together perspectives on hosting and pilgrimage to show how both can contribute to forms of “indirect mission”: a type of social action where overt intervention for missionary purposes is kept to a minimum, but where an implicit missionary intent is retained. While bringing in comparative material on cathedrals, my ethnographic focus is on the English pilgrimage site of Walsingham, a location of both Anglican and Roman Catholic shrines. I show how shrines work to become sites of reception for publics ranging from pious pilgrims to members of the general population as they seek recognition within both Catholic and secular liberal contexts.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.501
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial Sciences and MissionsSame topicReligious Tourism and SpacesFrench-language works237,207