MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2085766035 · doi:10.1080/00420980050004017

Co-existence in Selected Mixed Arab-Jewish Cities in Israel: By Choice or by Default?

2000· article· en· W2085766035 on OpenAlexaff
Ghazi Falah, Michael Hoy, Rakhal Sarker

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of GuelphUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExplanatory powerJudaismContext (archaeology)Explanatory modelPerceptionSociologyGeographyEpistemologyArchaeologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we use a data-set based on a survey of the perceptions about co-existence between Arabs and Jews as held by the inhabitants of five mixed Arab-Jewish cities in Israel: Acre, Haifa, Jaffa, Lydda and Ramla. Our main purpose is to determine the relative importance of various factors which contribute to the level of satisfaction with co-existence in Israel as perceived by the inhabitants themselves. Our choice of explanatory variables is motivated by a consideration of issues relating to the specific historical context of Jews and Arabs living together in these cities; and, an awareness of more general sociological considerations which may bear on the degree of satisfaction with co-existence. Our empirical analysis suggests that the variables relating to the specific historical evolution of Arab-Jewish relations-especially in the context of the urban setting-have the greatest explanatory power in understanding perceptions of co-existence. Basic sociological factors also hold some explanatory importance.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.042

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.323
Teacher spread0.281 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations36
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban StudiesSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207