MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2134332704 · doi:10.5539/ach.v2n2p133

A Study on Cultural and Environmental Basics at Formal Elements of Persian Gardens (before & after Islam)

2010· article· en· W2134332704 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammadsharif SHahidi, Mohamad Reza Bemanian, Nina Almasifar, Hanie Okhovat

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Culture and History · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Architectural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPersianIslamAtmosphere (unit)PerfectionIdeal (ethics)Set (abstract data type)Meaning (existential)Islamic cultureSociologySocial scienceAestheticsPsychologyEpistemologyHistoryGeographyComputer sciencePhilosophyArchaeologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article intends to study effective factors on Iranian gardens as similar atmosphere with meaning and environment values. First we try to study cultural roots of ancient Iran and its effect on elements and structure of Iranian gardens; in second chapter similarities among Islamic beliefs in Iranian gardens are studied. Then by accessing to a set of cultural-environmental criterions of Iran as an atmosphere that is binding to Iranian culture and beliefs and Iranian knowledge and techniques as a complementary factor is presented and finally Iranian gardens are presented as perfection and ideal work at its principles. Principles and criterions that are raised as a result of aforesaid factors have ever been developed during history of garden constructing in Iran have been maintained in spite of difference at material and main principles and criterions and surely it will be attention by architects.

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)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.201
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations7
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Culture and HistorySame topicHistorical and Architectural StudiesFrench-language works237,207