Au-delà de la crise. La finance islamique est-elle un moyen de régulation ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le système financier international souffre aujourd’hui, avec sa énième crise, des excès de l’endettement et des exubérances de l’ingénierie financière mondiale. Face à cette situation critique, la finance islamique s’est démarquée par sa résistance à la crise de l’automne 2008, ce qui a attiré l’attention des spécialistes et chercheurs, qui se sont interrogés sur les raisons de son immunité, ainsi que sur l’éventualité de la considérer comme une solution de remplacement potentielle au système actuel. Ce travail vise essentiellement à positionner la finance islamique au cœur de cette crise, d’expliciter ses apports pour le système financier international et d’analyser les différentes difficultés qui lui font encore obstacle. Cette étude constitue une synthèse des travaux effectués sur la finance islamique et une compilation des avis des gestionnaires bancaires et des spécialistes en finance islamique.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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".