MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2329785975 · doi:10.5539/ies.v9n4p175

Roots of Sin and Destruction of the Religious Education in the Shia Belief

2016· article· en· W2329785975 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mehri Sadeghiyan

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education Studies · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReligious educationIslamReligious beliefReligious controversiesSociologyOrder (exchange)PsychologyReligious studiesSocial psychologyTheologyPedagogyEpistemologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The religious Education is one of the key components of the present age detachment from which poses numerous problems for the society Islamic. One of the factors effective in the destruction of the religious Education is the roots of sin avoiding which can lead to the improvement of the religious Education of the members of the society. Thus, the present paper is aimed at familiarization with the most important roots of sin and its impacts on the destruction of the religious Education based on Islamic teachings In the Shia Belief. In order to achieve this goal, By means of a descriptive-analytical method, it has been attempted to look into the concept of sin and the religious Education and the most important roots of sin paving the way for the destruction of this lifestyle, so that according to them the members of society will be led towards a religious Education which will result in a society enriched and adorned by religious culture.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.019

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.011
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.405
Teacher spread0.370 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education StudiesSame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207