Integrated Encyclopedia of the Qurrhring n (IEQ). Volume 1 Edited by MUZAFFAR IQBAL
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is the first of a projected seven-volume reference work on the Qurʾān in English which draws its sources solely from the primary foundational texts of Islam and the Muslim scholarship on them from the past 1400 years. The word ‘Integrated’ is to indicate that the work will essay themes, persons, things, places, and events mentioned in the Qurʾān. The entire work is expected to treat some 600 entries, sorted according to the English alphabet. One question that may legitimately be raised is: why another encyclopaedia on the Qurʾān, given the monumental and scholarly six-volume tour de force, viz, Encyclopaedia of the Qurʾān, (Leiden: Brill, 2001–2006), edited by Jane D. McAuliffe [EQ]? But one may just as reasonably ask why there should be another exegetical work in view of the stupendous tafsīr and tafsīr-related works from Ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/688), through Mujāhid b. Jabr (d. ca. 104/722), al-Ṭabarī (d. 310/923), down to Sayyid Quṭb (d. 1966) and yet many more after him. A cursory look into the various tafsīr works readily reveals the variety of impulses, orientations, and circumstances which underlined every effort, thus justifying any subsequent addition to the exegetical heritage. By the same token, another encyclopaedia on the Qurʾān may not be superfluous if there are enough reasons to justify it, and this is exactly what the editor of the volume under review has provided in the introduction. Colonialism and Orientalism have virtually severed the connections of contemporary Muslims with Arabic and Arabic sources on the Qurʾān, such that literate Muslims have had to rely on translations and/or commentaries on the Qurʾān in non-Arabic media which, according to the General Editor, are both intellectually and spiritually suspect insofar as the text is then ‘necessarily mediated and conditioned by the epoch, location, and spiritual and intellectual standpoint of the translator’ (p. xii).
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.014 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.272 | 0.148 |
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".