Bibliographic record
Abstract
Religion can be defined objectively and subjectively, both recognizing man’s dependence on a transcendent being. The object of Igbo religious belief and worship are three: God, non – human spirits and the ancestors. Since the coming of the colonial masters the practice and worship of the ideal Igbo religion have been on the decline. As a result proper emphasis and modern technologies have not been used to modify and enhance the Igbo religious architecture. This study initiates the proper study of the indigenous Igbo religion, its customs and tradition and also their religion architecture in order to introduce new and advanced method in its architecture thereby encouraging its practice. This can be achieved by proper study of the dogma in the religion, symbolism of different elements used in the practice of the religion, knowing the detailed reason behind every construction method, planting of various trees, and landscape of various shrines thus substituting the elements of construction which cannot stand the test of time for a more superior material which can serve the worshippers for at least a century. Finally, after a close study of the Igbo religion, it can be seen that every religion has the same process of worship and belief. With that in mind, proper attention is to be paid to the disintegrating and dilapidated religious practices and structures of the Igbo religious architecture and hence salvage what is left of it.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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.
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".