MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1606427053 · doi:10.5539/ass.v11n13p84

An Empirical Analysis on Legitimacy of Sukuk: An Insight of Malaysian Sukuk

2015· article· en· W1606427053 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Essia Ries Ahmed, Md. Aminul Islam, Ku Halim Ku Ariffin

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSukukLegitimacyIslamBusinessIslamic financePosition (finance)ShariaFinancial instrumentAccountingFinancial systemEconomicsFinancePolitical scienceLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Islamic Sukuk have a key impact and high influence in different economic and banking transactions where they have got an estimable position in financial markets and international money. Recently, sukuk have been considered as one of the fastest industries in its growth in international financial landscape and also considered as the most successful financial products among the Islamic financial institutions. Institutions should be giving more attention to sukuk development and to ensuring that these sukuk are compliant with Sharia requirements. The main objective of this paper is to determine the factors which influencing on sukuk legitimacy. A total of 54 Islamic sukuk Islamic financial institutions in Malaysia representing the whole population were selected. Secondary data was used and sourced from the sukuk shariah report. Using descriptive statistics, the existence and the extent of existence of legitimacy in Islamic sukuk in Islamic financial institutions in Malaysia was ascertained. The research found that the selected factors influence on sukuk legitimacy are could be used as subjects of references in determining the existence of legitimacy in shariah pronouncements.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.524
Threshold uncertainty score0.405

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.279 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations44
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207