MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7056595795

Global Spirit of Prophecy Reading Habits

2019· article· en· W7056595795 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Commons - Andrews University (Andrews University) · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReading (process)Quarter (Canadian coin)White (mutation)Chose
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As part of the 2018 Global Church Member Survey (GCMS), members around the world were asked how often they read the writings of Ellen G. White (Q26.04). Interestingly, only about one in six respondents shared that they read her writings daily or more than once a day, with just under five indicating that they do so several times a week. Slightly more than a quarter (26.3%) read her writings less than once a month, while 20.7% report that they never read the works of Ellen White. A similar study, conducted in 2013, revealed, similarly, that one in six respondents read her writings daily or more than once a day, but the additional percentage who read her several times a week was two percentage points higher (21%) than in 2018. A quarter (25%) reported reading Ellen White less than once a month and 19% reported that they never do so.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.959
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.009
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.192 · 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
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Commons - Andrews University (Andrews University)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207