MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4403116880 · doi:10.1163/27725472-09503010

Reply to Hsiao

2024· article· en· W4403116880 on OpenAlexaff
Chris Barrigar

Bibliographic record

Venue˜The œEvangelical quarterly · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicWar, Ethics, and Justification
Canadian institutionsSt. Peter's Hospital
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Barrigar addresses more directly the distinction between Hsiao’s individualist-level priority on self-protection and the author’s priority on the well-being (security) of society as a whole (and thereby of the individuals within society). The author argues that our starting point as Christians is not natural law and individual rights but rather God’s vision of shalom for societies. (On top of which the author argues that Hsiao’s natural law claims are disputable anyway). The author also addresses more substantially the issue of collateral harms to society within high gun-culture, a significant type of cost to society that is inadequately recognised in the literature. The author concludes by returning to his central argument, namely, that a central component of any theology of guns must include an account of agape -love, of self-sacrifice for the benefit of others, which Hsiao’s response insufficiently addresses.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.810
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.012

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.278
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue˜The œEvangelical quarterlySame topicWar, Ethics, and JustificationFrench-language works237,207