MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2461430240 · doi:10.5539/mas.v10n10p55

Islamic Dealings with Non-Muslims in Their Religious Occasions

2016· article· en· W2461430240 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mohammed Sabbar Taha, Abdull Rahman Mahmood, Jaffary Awang, Ahamd Munawer Imail, Mohammed 'Abdulhameed Sleibi

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Applied Science · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicLegal Studies and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversiti Kebangsaan Malaysia
KeywordsIslamLegislationReligious beliefOvertakingLawSocial psychologyReligious lawPsychologySociologyPolitical scienceEpistemologyPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this study, one of the main comprehending features of Islamic legislation is that all religions; whether they are celestial or not from the Islamic countries, it is stated in the legislation regarding dealing controls with non-Muslims such as how to deal with them in their religious and non-religious occasions. Recently, there some overtaking from some Muslims during the participation of non-Muslims in their occasions, especially in (holidays), refers to different reasons. The objectives and methods of this study mentioned that the jurists’ sayings include religious rituals as well as exclude them. This issue requires the topic from the belief side, using induction approach texts and analyzing the sayings. In conclusion, this study leads to the prohibition of participating in their religious occasions, except that serves religion and Muslims. In addition to what is necessary it is permissible to participate in occasions which don’t have religious rituals, and clarify negative effects in participation and ways of treatments.

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 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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score0.752

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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 venueModern Applied ScienceSame topicLegal Studies and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207