Indonesian Islamic Studies: Selected Dissertation Bibliography 1980-1999
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Continuing the previous edition, this bibliography presents dissertations titles produced mainly from universities in Australia, America, and Canada. Not only dissertations ones, some important theses are also displayed in this bibliography. The period 1980-1999 is a salient period in the process of Indonesian Islamic studies development. Since 1990 Minister of Religious Affairs has selectively sent Indonesian scholars finishing their master degree to McGill University. For the result, they produced theses master on Indonesian Islam. On the one hand, this theses can be used as an evidence that Indonesian scholars were able to “introduce” Indonesian Islam abroad; on the other hand, this introduction focuses on leaders thought—which is then dominated the pattern of Islamic studies in Indonesian Islamic higher education institutions. In comparison, dissertation/thesis from the universities in the United States and Australia shows notable interesting assumption that during that period the scholars whose background are Islamic studies tend to produce theological-doctrinal dissertation/thesis as well as that of leaders-thought; while scholars with social and cultural background tend to review Islam from the attending problems in society.Keywords: Islamic Studies, McGill University, Bibliography, Dissertation, Indonesia
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.009 | 0.018 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.006 |
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".