MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3095713358 · doi:10.1080/00263206.2020.1831473

Evolution of economic thought in the Ottoman Empire and early Republican Turkey

2020· article· en· W3095713358 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Vedit İnal

Bibliographic record

VenueMiddle Eastern Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMercantilismOttoman empireTurkishQuarter (Canadian coin)Subject (documents)EliteTurkish republicEconomic ThoughtAncient historyEconomic historyPolitical scienceHistoryEmpireThe RepublicClassicsSociologyLawPolitical economyPoliticsPhilosophyArchaeologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Up until the late eighteenth century, the economic understanding of the Ottoman elite was based on the worldview of the scholars of the Madrasah system. The first Ottoman treatises in modern economics began to be written in the second quarter of the nineteenth century, close to 300 years after the emergence of the subject during the Mercantilist era. The nineteenth century witnessed a gradual increase in economic analyses, together with the introduction of the subject in various institutions of higher education. However, a breakthrough in the development of economic thinking in the country had to wait until the foundation of the Republic in 1923, the emergence of the journal Kadro and the establishment of Istanbul University a decade later. This article traces the emergence and development of economics in the Ottoman Empire and in the first decade and a half of the Turkish Republic.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.051
Threshold uncertainty score0.186

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.073
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.225 · 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

Citations2
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMiddle Eastern StudiesSame topicIslamic Studies and HistoryFrench-language works237,207