The Influence of Naqshbandi Sheikhs on Educational Process of Timurid Era
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the ninth century (A.H.) the number of Sufis and their sects increased due to Timurids’ attention to Sufis, and as a consequence convents (Khaneqa) became one of the most important economical and political centers. Excessive wealth and spiritual influence of Sufis leaders particularly Sheikhs of Naqshbani kingdom result in Sufism power being twice as much so that, Timurid kings and Sultans used their spiritual influence to legitimize their rules and tried not only to respect and honor them but also, to construct and operate their Khaneqas. Close relationship between Naqshbani’s leaders and Timurid Sultans had a great influence on most country’s affairs, particularly education and training as most of removal and installations in the field of educational affairs were under their views. In this survey, the impact of Naqshbandi’s Sheikhs on educational process during Timurid period was investigated and analyzed by citing library references and implementing analytical-descriptive method.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".