MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2586519073 · doi:10.1558/rsth.v34i2.29231

Reconsidering Limited Representations of Islam and Muslims

2015· article· en· W2586519073 on OpenAlexaff
Zahra Kasamali

Bibliographic record

VenueReligious Studies and Theology · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation and Islamic Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSensibilityIslamPraxisFaithAestheticsReflection (computer programming)PoliticsSociologyEpistemologyFeelingPhilosophyPolitical scienceLawTheologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The spirit and intent of this reflection is to open up the ways in which the “single storying” of Islam and Muslims limits more ethical forms of relationality. This reflective piece seeks to make evident the ways in which limited representations of particular faith traditions produces feelings of isolation, exclusion and a sense of disconnect from others. Drawing upon métissage principles, this reflection will elucidate lived experiences on their own terms. Métissage as a research sensibility and political praxis can validate ways of knowing and being that are often denied.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.099
Threshold uncertainty score0.297

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
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 head0.115
GPT teacher head0.373
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueReligious Studies and TheologySame topicEducation and Islamic StudiesFrench-language works237,207