MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2544432138 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v9n9p41

Proprietary Value in Shiite Jurisprudence and Positive Law of the Islamic Republic of Iran

2016· article· en· W2544432138 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Atefeh Lorkojuri, Mohamad Ali Heidari, Masoud Raei

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIslamic Finance and Banking Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsValue (mathematics)Civil codeFiqhJurisprudenceIslamProperty (philosophy)LawShariaProfit (economics)Law and economicsBusinessPolitical scienceEconomicsPhilosophyMathematicsTheologyMicroeconomicsEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Proprietary value is one of the conditions related to the considerations (price and sold object) in a sale contract. Property has been defined by legal experts in several ways including the idea that property should have the capability to be changed to money, to have value, and to be demanded by human will. According to Article 348 of Civil Code of the Islamic Republic of Iran, the sale of something that is not (describable as) property or which can bring no reasonable profit is null. In this regard, time and place circumstances play an important role in the determination of proprietary value. Famous legal experts and jurists have proposed different ideas about proprietary value so that the criterion for identification of proprietary value of a good has been regarded either religious or customary. This article tries to introduce proprietary value, time and place circumstances, and different ideas about proprietary value as a condition for contracts.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.046

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.028
Scholarly communication0.0050.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.209 · 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 venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicIslamic Finance and Banking StudiesFrench-language works237,207