MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080655351 · doi:10.3366/jqs.2001.3.1.91

Scientific Exegesis of the Qur'an

2001· article· en· W2080655351 on OpenAlex
Ẓafar Isḥāq Anṣārī

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

VenueJournal of Qur anic Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExegesisExposition (narrative)ArabicQuarter (Canadian coin)Interpretation (philosophy)LiteratureHistorySection (typography)Period (music)ClassicsPhilosophyArtLinguisticsAestheticsArchaeologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Baljon, in his Modern Muslim Koran Interpretation: 1880–1960, (published in 1961), devoted a section to the scientific exegesis of the Qur'an. In the seventies, the authors of three other major works which are devoted to, or are at least concerned with, modern Qur'anic exegesis – al-Dhahabī, al-Sharqāwī and Jansen – also allocated substantial space to an exposition and analysis of this trend in their studies on Tafsīr especially in the modern period. This paper is a continuation of such studies. It takes note of this trend and covers, to some extent, the same ground that has already been covered by other scholars. It focuses, however, on the study of this trend roughly during the last quarter of a century. In view of the linguistic proficiency of the writer in Arabic, English and Urdu, the inquiry is mainly confined to the writings in these languages and focuses on the Arab world, South Asia and the English-speaking countries.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.445
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.273 · 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