MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7058003589

Křest na pozadí liturgických reforem 16. a 20. století

2008· dissertation· en· W7058003589 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature) · 2008
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicMagnetic confinement fusion research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBaptismLiturgyTheme (computing)TypologyRelation (database)Work (physics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work Liturgical Reforms and Renewal concerning baptism in the 16th and 20th century explores relationship between liturgical reforms of baptismal rites in the 16th century and contemporary liturgical movement. The main theme of the work is the transformation of Christian initiation at the end of 20th and its relation to the reforms of baptismal rites in the reformation period. The first part of the work describes reforms of Lutheran and Anglican baptismal rites. There are two main sources used for comparison: Luther's Taufbüchleins and first two editions of the Book of Common Prayer. The second part of the work is dedicated to contemporary efforts to renew baptismal rites. The rites of Canadian Anglicans and Lutherans serve as prototypes. The investigation of baptismal rites is preceded by the theological examination of any performed changes. The conclusion of the work transcends its aim when it shows the problems of renewal in wider context. It provides with the typology of the opponents of liturgical movement and tries to bring deeper insight into historical connections which form their attitudes. In the conclusion, we can find author's perspective on the contribution of renewal in baptismal theology and liturgy for the broadest ecumena. This work came into being at the Institute of Ecumenical Studies...

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), Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.415
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.237 · 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
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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDigital Repository (National Repository of Grey Literature)Same topicMagnetic confinement fusion researchFrench-language works237,207