Bibliographic record
Abstract
Review by Nevad KahteranThe Teaching and Study of Islam in Western Universities as Routledge publication should be applauded in this cacophony in the post-9/11 world with the rise of interest in Islam and Islamic matters across the globe, necessitating an explanation of the authentic teaching of this religion anew in light of the challenges of the present-day situation not only in New Zealand, Australia and Pacific region, including the Canadian context there as well, but world-wide. Among many other efforts taken in the meantime, something similar was done in the European context as earlier Brill's edition of Muslims in the Enlarged Europe: Religion and Society, ed. By Brigitte Maréchal, Stefano Allievi, Felice Dassetto and Jørgen Nielsen (Brill, Leiden-Boston, 2003) with its speacial stress on After September 11: Islam in General and European Muslims. Also, we could add intersting report on Islam on Campus: teaching Islamic Studies at Higher Education Institutions in the UK (Report of a conference held at the University of Edinburgh, 4 December 2006 in: Journal of Beliefs & Values, Volume 28, Issue 3, 2007, pages 309-329), The Islam in the West Program (currently housed at the Prince Alwaleed Islamic Studies Program), among many other undertakings in this regard as good examples of similar efforts.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".