MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The limits of constitutionalism in the Muslim world: History and identity in Islamic law

2008· book-chapter· en· W2270994044 on OpenAlex
Anver M. Emon

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscienceLawIslamConstitutionalismHuman rightsPolitical scienceReligious freedomShariaFundamental rightsPhilosophyDemocracyPoliticsTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract In the fields of constitutional law and human rights, protection from discrimination on religious grounds is a significant concern. Constitutions around the world protect religious liberty and conscience, as do various human rights documents. However, sometimes these same constitutions have limiting phrases that also raise human rights concerns. For example, constitutions in the Muslim world, while protecting religious freedom and conscience, also state that no law can violate Shari’a principles. If one defines Shari’a to include the historical tradition that discriminated on religious grounds, a conflict arises between upholding Shari’a and protecting religious freedom.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.914
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.243 · 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

Quick stats

Citations18
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207