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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
While the textual flow of the Qur'an is notoriously challenging and complex, it is also the case that in the process of reading or listening the centre of narrative gravity is never lost. This powerful focus may be termed the epic journey, a struggle from a state of barbarousness to one of civilisation, from ignorance to enlightenment. The hero of this ‘epic’ is, of course, the prophet or messenger, for whom history, as told in the Qur'an, provides many examples. In this paper we will examine basic, sometimes disputed, features of the epic as they may be recognised in a series of such works (for example, The Odyssey, ‘Gilgamesh’, The Shah-nameh, The Divine Comedy, and Paradise Lost). Such reflection is useful for scholarship in a world where the Qur'an is so obviously a part of the shared, if not always recognised, literary heritage of humanity. Among the subsidiary themes to be tested against the notion of ‘epic’ are: humanity, community, apocalypse, and the path or road. In addition to such thematic questions, other compositional and stylistic features of the epic will be studied: orality, rhetoric, figure, metonymy, metre, rhyme, and voice. Finally, the question of audience and performance will be broached to further delineate similarities and differences amongst various theories of the epic, as they can or cannot be applied to the Qur'an.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it