The Analysis of the Component of the Political Legitimacy from the Perspective of Islamic-Iranian Intellectual Trends
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study of the component of the political legitimacy in particular from the perspective of Islamic-Iranian intellectual trends during the third to eight centuries A.H. shows the drawing of a pyramid-shape society either from the viewpoint of political philosophy or other trends. In this case, the views of Farabi, Avicenna, Khajeh Nasir and other thinkers can be referred to, such that it will be possible to establish a common attribute among the ideal king society, philosopher king and Imam or Sultan within the framework of Iranian – Islamic political thought. Of course all thinkers consider some distinguishing features for the head and ruler based on their own thoughts and analyses. However, accepting the belief of “Imamate”, [The Shia Islamic Doctrine], the Shiites placed the concept of legitimacy within a specific framework based on the rule of grace and also Qur-anic exact text. Imam is the legitimate ruler and he is the one who has been determined and appointed based on the exact text from the predecessor of Ali (a.s.), from the generation of Fatemeh (s) and from the branch of Hussein ibn Ali, so if it occurs, it is legitimate, i.e. it is based on religious laws.
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".