MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W253022656

Akhond Khorasani's Viewpoints towards Modern Concepts POINTS DE VUE DE KHORASANI AKHOND VIS-À-VIS DES CONCEPTS MODERNES

2011· article· en· W253022656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Alireza Soroush, Sarvinder Kaur Sandhu, Hamed Alaei

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian social science · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Development and Education Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsViewpointsParliamentRelation (database)ConstitutionalismPoliticsOrder (exchange)SociologyEconomic JusticePolitical revolutionLawEpistemologySocial sciencePolitical sciencePhilosophyDemocracyArt
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1906, at the dawn of the twentieth century, Akhond Khorasani assumed the leadership of the Iranian constitutional revolution. He was a prominent figure in Iranian history regarding whom this paper sets out to unveil his mentality vis-a-vis the modern concepts of freedom, constitutionalism, justice and parliament. Before the occurrence of the constitutional revolution, such concepts were not present in Iran's political - social culture. These were modern concepts which entered Iran coming from the west and were subsequently utilized during the constitutional revolution. As the revolution's leader, Akhond Khorasani made use of these words in his political literature. Discovering the manner in which he integrated and used these concepts in his works is the objective of this article. In order to reach this objective, all the primary sources that included the Akhond's announcements, letters, telegraphs, answers to questions and fatwas through which he specified his political mentality are made use of in this quantitative research where the method of evident content analysis is implemented for the purpose of data analysis. Iran is a society intertwined to a high degree with religion and thus the clergy are highly influential on the people. The understanding and comprehension of traditional clergies' mentality in relation to modern concepts has the potential to shed light on the issue of whether this influence can be continued.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0060.017
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.086
GPT teacher head0.392
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian social scienceSame topicSocial Development and Education ResearchFrench-language works237,207