MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7115819044

The Motives of Canadian Baptist Women Missionaries to India, 1905–1910

2025· article· en· W7115819044 on OpenAlexaffabout

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicReligion, Gender, and Enlightenment
Canadian institutionsMcMaster Divinity College
Fundersnot available
KeywordsColonialismChristianityIndependence (probability theory)PoliticsCorporate governancePassion
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

During the colonial period, namely in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, Canadian Baptist women missionaries had a notable impact in India. Their association with imperial authority was intricate and diverse, shaped by their religious undertaking and the broader political circumstances of British colonial governance in India. Canadian Baptist women missionaries were motivated by a fervent evangelical passion to propagate Christianity in India. The missionaries participated in educational and social reform endeavours in India. They founded educational institutions, orphanages, and medical centres, offering schooling and medical care to Indian women and children. Although the Canadian Baptist women missionaries had humanitarian intents, they were frequently perceived as catalysts of cultural imperialism. This research is based on the work of Canadian Baptist missionaries in India between 1905 and 1910, much before Indian Independence (1947), and it will demonstrate that Canadian Baptist women missionaries had several interrelated motives, central being the betterment of the people.

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)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.080
Threshold uncertainty score0.578

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0280.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.182
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicReligion, Gender, and EnlightenmentFrench-language works237,207