MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Edward W. Said: A Faithful Narrator of Palestinian Dispossession and Staunch Opponent of the Oslo Accords

2011· article· en· W2758768183 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Muhammad Shuraydi

Bibliographic record

VenueArab world geographer · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativePalestinian refugeesZionismContext (archaeology)DemocracyOrientalismCredibilityState (computer science)Identity (music)Political scienceInclusion (mineral)AdversaryLawSociologyGender studiesHistoryRefugeeTheologyLiteraturePhilosophyArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper examines the legacy of Edward Said within the context of the Palestinian question dating back to the publication of his Arab Portrayed (1970). The basic features of Said's discursive analysis of Palestinian dispossession are extracted and explored. These include: Orientalism and the fabrication of facts; the narration of Palestinian history in its own right without distortion and reduction as a function of Zionism; the need for intellectuals in the West to critically evaluate their role vis-a-vis Palestinian dispossession and the distortion of its narration in the West; the need for reconciliation between Palestinians and Israeli Jews, including his call for a one binational secular democratic state for both Israelis and Palestinians; his insistence on a narrative of inclusion of the Palestinian people and their rights, including self-determination and liberation.Campaigns slandering his Palestinian identity, academic credibility, and professional integrity were waged by Zionists and pro-...

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.010

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.267
Teacher spread0.237 · 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueArab world geographerSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207