MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412973696 · doi:10.57076/y6y9m158

Liturgy on the Cusp of Secondary Orality

2017· article· en· W4412973696 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueWheaton Writing A Journal of Academic Essays · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Communication, and Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWonderScholarshipOralityThe artsRhetorical questionMeaning (existential)JudaismArtAestheticsSociologyLiteraturePhilosophyMedia studiesArt historyVisual artsEpistemologyTheologyLawLiteracyPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper starts of lightly and playfully, before suddenly plunging the reader into a never-beforeconsidered What-If scenario regarding the ultimate allegiances of media theorist Marshall McLuhan. Arguing that McLuhan’s understanding of human sense-ratios may have qualified him to be a better candidate for Messianic Judaism than Roman Catholicism, precisely to the degree that the former favors primacy of the ear over the eye in a way that is complicated by the latter’s use of imagery, the author makes a first-ever claim (for McLuhan scholarship) that the Canadian media theorist may have felt equally at home, and equally a fish out of water, in a Jewish congregation than in a Catholic cathedral. Provocative and resonant in the McLuhan rhetorical Jameson Award Winners: Arts and Communication tradition off a scholarly “probe,” this piece reveals its author to be both remarkably gifted at research, synthesis, and integration, and to be startlingly gifted at deriving new theses worthy of serious consideration. Marshall McLuhan once said that God was a “ceaseless invitation to wonder,” and this paper’s effect is precisely that: a surprisingly fresh invitation to wonder at a highly plausible “What-If” scenario that never came to pass. With a bibliographic citations page of thirty entries, the paper is sufficiently substantive in its scholarship and the author is encouraged to submit the work for publication in the appropriate journals.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.024
Threshold uncertainty score0.080

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.021
Scholarly communication0.0130.010
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0020.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.004

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.400
Teacher spread0.314 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWheaton Writing A Journal of Academic EssaysSame topicMedia, Communication, and EducationFrench-language works237,207