MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2150228276 · doi:10.1558/cis.v6i1-2.67

Christian Responses to Ahmad Khan's Commentary on the Bible

2011· article· en· W2150228276 on OpenAlexaff
Alan M. Guenther

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Islamic Studies · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical and Linguistic Studies
Canadian institutionsBriercrest College and Seminary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamChristianityDistrustReligious studiesTrustworthinessPublishingCivilizationSign (mathematics)TheologyPhilosophySociologyHistoryLawPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan began publishing a commentary on the Bible in 1862, he intended the work to dispel the distrust between the Muslim and Christian communities that the Revolt of 1857 had heightened. While the Christians who responded to his efforts did laud his clarification of the traditional Muslim position on the trustworthiness of the Christian Scriptures, they generally interpreted the commentary in light of their own efforts to bring Christianity and civilization to India. They saw Ahmad Khan’s work to be a sign that Muslim prejudices and defences against Christianity were crumbling, and that the conversion of India was progressing. However, they were not prepared to consider it as increasing their own understanding of the Bible or even their understanding of Islam.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.017
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.017
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0180.009
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0090.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.316
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.101 · 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

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Islamic StudiesSame topicHistorical and Linguistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207