MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289981769 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n3p57

Lakatos’s Research Program and the thought of the Islamic Republic

2016· article· en· W2289981769 on OpenAlex
Ali Alihosseini, Hamidreza Keshavarz

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIslamic Thought and Society Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHard coreIslamEpistemologyScientific theoryCore (optical fiber)Research programPoint (geometry)Foundation (evidence)History of scienceSociologyLawComputer sciencePhilosophyMathematicsPolitical sciencePhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the volatile history of science, we come across a series of theories and methods, each of which has emerged and has been used at some point and has been replaced later by another method. These multiple methods and theories have each caused science and scientific knowledge to advance one step forward. One of these theories is Imre Lakatos’s research program which, though a theory often considered in the analysis of the trends of the empirical sciences, given the general principles and the dominant spirit of this theory, it can be also used to study other intellectual currents. Lakatos believes that any theory is a research program that is composed of two parts: a hard core and a protective belt. The hard core is the basis and foundation of every thought and theory .To protect the main theory and to protect it against changes, there exist the protective belts that are somehow a supplement to the core of the theory .According to Lakatos, the progressive or retrogressive nature of a research program depends on the ability and acceptability of the auxiliary hypotheses which serve to protect the hard core. Thus, a research program can be progressive and dynamic if it causes new theories which bring about new predictions by modifying the protective belt. This article has considered the notion of the Islamic Republic of Iran as a research program. In this regard, this study is an attempt to determine the functions of ‘expediency’ in the Islamic Republic using an impression of the concept of ‘expediency’ which is similar to the protective belt by considering Islam as a hard core and as a resistant framework. This article is also an attempt to emphasize the point that, in the Islamic Republic, the concept of ‘expediency’ has the same function which is noted as the protective belt in Lakatos’s view. Therefore, using the notion of ‘interest’ by the advocates of the hard core is an attempt made to prevent the rejection of the hard core and pave the way for the development and change in Islam as an efficient religion.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.512
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.014
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.052
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.241 · 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