MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2525131870 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n8p108

Shiite and Sunni Political Expediency Position in Jurisprudence: A Case Study of Political Thought of Imam Komeini and Abu Ishaq Shatby

2016· article· en· W2525131870 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marzieh Samaei Sahneh Saraei, Jalal Dorakhshah, Rahim Khastu

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJurisprudenceViewpointsPoliticsPolitical scienceFiqhLawIslamSociologyPhilosophyShariaTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

"Interest" is one of the basic concepts of political jurisprudence that Shia and Sunni scholars have developed different opinions about it. In the sphere of Shiite political jurisprudence, especially after the Islamic Revolution of Iran, the concept was deemed appropriate status in the vote and the views of Imam Khomeini were manifested. In Sunni jurisprudence, numerous scholars have examined this issue that they can be named the most outstanding Abu Isac Shatby. In this article, the question is: what are the differences and similarities of Imam Khomeini's viewpoints of Abu Isac Shatby on the issue of the interest and the research method is descriptive and regarding the title is matching that is woth for exploration and investigation.

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: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.820
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

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 studies0.0000.001
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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.312 · 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 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

Citations1
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207