Impact of Modern Technologies on Islamic Architecture in Malaysia and Middle East
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The use and application of modern technologies in designing and building well-lit constructions has a variety of definitions and interpretations. Indeed, architects contend that such uses of technology depend on conditions, background and the presumptions of the design and the location. The use of technology to design and build constructions with respect to their conditions and situations is considered to be a novel and particular concept in modern architecture. Architecture, due to its contact with human life plays an important role in weakening of culture in identity in the face of globalization. However, the modernity in architecture, especially in Islamic Architecture, has misled the architect with regards to the fundamental characteristics of Islamic Architecture, which is supposed to show modesty, sustainability and more humanity in their design. Modernity has made Islamic architecture more arrogant and lost into the idea of capitalism. This study is to investigate the positive and negative impacts of modern technologies on Islamic Architecture, including Malaysia and Middle East countries. The objectives are to identify the issues on how modern technologies are affecting Islamic Architecture and to understand the real the meaning of Islam in modern Architecture. Extensive reviews were carried out to gather and analyze information with regards to this matter. After a qualitative analysis of the gathered information, suggestions can be made on how to help improve the current situation. The findings show that modern technology help increase accessibility and utilization of important places in Islam, however it is also destroying the historical value of those places which played an important role in the spreading 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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".