MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1515808148 · doi:10.1108/00242531311329455

Role of classification schemes in organization of Islamic knowledge in libraries

2013· article· en· W1515808148 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueLibrary Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOriginalityIslamLibrary classificationIndigenousKnowledge organizationComputer scienceKnowledge managementGrey literatureValue (mathematics)Work (physics)SociologyData scienceLibrary sciencePolitical scienceSocial scienceEngineeringQualitative researchLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Purpose Classification systems play a fundamental role in the organization, display, retrieval and access to the knowledge materials in libraries. These systems have served the purpose adequately in most of knowledge areas; nevertheless, some grey areas lack proper place and enumeration in these systems. Islamic knowledge is among the areas that have not been properly addressed. The purpose of this paper is to examine this problem and indicate a potential solution. Design/methodology/approach This paper expands on the author's earlier research which focused on Pakistan library collections. Empirical data have been collected from 16 LIS scholars who have interest in or expertise on this issue through interviews. Scholars are from Pakistan, India, Malaysia, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UK, the USA and Canada. A review of the literature is also presented. Findings A number of approaches have been taken to work around the deficiencies of the standard classification systems when it comes to Islamic knowledge and publications, including indigenous systems and expansions. Details of some of these are presented. A range of possible improvements to existing classification systems was suggested by scholars, and an outline of what is required in a new, independent system is discussed, along with ideas about the best way for this system to be developed. Originality/value The paper discusses an area of professional concern that has been discussed widely in Islamic countries, but only in a limited fashion outside of Islamic countries. Thus, the paper should be of interest to researchers and practitioners interested in cataloguing and classification theory.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
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 communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.272 · 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