MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4401177416 · doi:10.1163/15685357-02802005

Sacred Soil, Green Ideals

2024· article· en· W4401177416 on OpenAlexaff
Einat Kramer, Itay Greenspan, Tanhum Yoreh

Bibliographic record

VenueWorldviews Global Religions Culture and Ecology · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStewardship (theology)Environmental ethicsEnvironmental stewardshipJudaismSociologyPolitical scienceEnvironmental resource managementLawGeographyArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Shemitah, the Jewish sabbatical year, is increasingly being explored in ecological contexts. This research delves into the concept of stewardship examining the evolving discourse on Shemitah across different community sectors in the Israeli press during the last three sabbatical cycles (2007–2008, 2014–2015, and 2021–2022). Our analysis reveals stewardship worldviews that portray Jewish law as either the practical pathway to implement these worldviews or as an inspiration for contemporary socio-environmental initiatives. The secular-liberal sector emphasizes universal stewardship, aligning with Western environmental concepts, while the national-religious sector integrates both universal and particular stewardship, emphasizing the land’s moral dimensions and connecting religious observance with environmental ethics. The ultra-Orthodox sector, though not explicitly expressing eco-theological views, focuses on soil regeneration. This empirical investigation serves as a significant case study and offers valuable guidance for addressing the challenge of instigating behavioral change in religious and traditional populations.

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)0.001
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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.023
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.236 · 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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorldviews Global Religions Culture and EcologySame topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207