Bibliographic record
Abstract
After I was diagnosed with prostate cancer, a frequent companion of men my age, I spoke first to those closest to me informed.In one particular instance I was speaking of my cancer with my former seminary colleague and friend Allen Jorgenson.After a few brief exchanges he brought to my attention a book by Dr. Deanna Thompson called Hoping for More.In retrospect I think Allen knew that this book would be a "two-fer" (to use current lingo) for me.He was dead He knew that I had read and reviewed her earlier book on Luther, Crossing the Divide (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), which book on the Reformer's theology that I have ever read.Knowing that and having told me he was going to have his class read portions of Hoping for More, he told me about the content of this book with the suggestion that Knowing that I was going to the annual conference of the Society of Biblical Literature (SBL) and the American Academy of Religion (AAR) in Chicago, I discovered that Dr. Thompson was going to be the to buy the book before I left for the Conference to no avail.On the first day of the conference I was able to buy it at the publisher book stall, but I only had the chance to read about eighteen pages of it before she and I had a chat at the café area near the book stalls.Suffice it to say that, in person, Deanna Thompson echoes the Deanna Thompson in the book to perfection (albeit the kind of Lutheran "simul justus et peccator" that we are required to affirm).How to review such a book?Virtually impossible, or, at least, most difficult!And, no, I am not talking about any personal stuff having to do with my own cancer.What I am talking about is having neither the time nor space to narrate the Nonetheless, I try in two faltering ways: thematic highlights and 'tasting the book."First, the thematic highlights.After some serious disabling back pain, Deanna Thompson went in for medical tests, only to receive the shocking di breast cancer, a lethal stage that numerically means that her chance of living beyond five years is slender indeed.Add to that the facts that she is a mom of two girls at the cusp of teen-age-dom, that she and her beloved husband Ne that somewhere in this book this P.K. called herself "a nice Minnesota girl") and that the best part of her career lay ahead of her, then one can see how absolutely devastating the news of this monstrous cancer was.Hoping for More is a journey, Deanna Thompson's journey from that fateful diagnosis to the present, living with cancer as a constant companion in all facets of her rich life -family, friends, faith and academic life.She invites you into her life with ca openness to the point where the reader is compelled to feel privileged to share her walk.One becomes her companion (compagnon means "breaking bread with") whereby Dr. Thompson lays bare her fears, her pain, her faith Hoping for More: Having Cancer, Talking Faith and Accepting Grace
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.008 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".