MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3092360291 · doi:10.35632/ajis.v28i2.1266

Wissenschaft des Judentums as a Paradigm for New Muslim Approaches to Islam

2011· article· en· W3092360291 on OpenAlexaff
Khaleel Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueAmerican Journal of Islam and Society · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamReligious studiesEnlightenmentGermanPeriod (music)Identity (music)ChristianitySubculture (biology)SociologyTheologyHistoryPhilosophyAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although Wissenschaft des Judentums was the brainchild of German Jews,it reflected the aims of European Jews in general. As noted by the late ProfessorAmos Funkenstein, “even if we grant that the majority of traditionalJews in France, Austria, and Germany were not aware of the full scopeof the achievements of the Wissenschaft, its results nevertheless faithfullyreflected the desires and self-image of nineteenth-century Jews craving foremancipation, the mood of the “perplexed of the times.”1 The period ofthe Enlightenment did little to change the lot of the Jew: he was still seenby many as a Christ-killer, his identity linked to a particular nation—andhe could, therefore, never be fully accepted as part of any other nationalentity. Although some Jews may have become totally assimilated and evenconverted to Christianity, the general perception was that the Jews wantedto be conditional citizens: while adopting the culture of the environment,they wanted to preserve their special nature as a subculture ...

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.053

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.046
Scholarly communication0.0100.007
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.133
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.166 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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 routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAmerican Journal of Islam and SocietySame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207