MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4253812197 · doi:10.33511/alfanar.v2n1.93-112

TAFSIR EKOLOGI

2019· article· en· W4253812197 on OpenAlexaff
Mamluatun Nafisah

Bibliographic record

VenueJurnal Al-Fanar · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIslamic Studies and Radicalism
Canadian institutionsWiLAN (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamSoulDoctrineSafeguardingPunishment (psychology)Environmental ethicsEpistemologyPhilosophyLaw and economicsSociologyTheologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper wants to position environmental aspects as the main doctrine (ushūl) of Islamic law which is possible to influence and change the mainstream of human beings to behave well towards the existence of the environment. Ontologically, the hifẓ al-bī'ah paradigm is built on the basis of the maṣlaḥah concept which is the core of the concept of maqāṣid ash-sharī'ah formulated in al-kulliyyāt al-khamsa (Five basic benefits), namely guarding religion (hifẓ ad-din) , guarding the soul (hifẓ an-nafs), guarding offspring (hifẓ an-nasl), guarding reason (hifẓ al-'aql) and safeguarding wealth (hif (al-māl). These five things are a necessity to enforce benefit. Specifically the correlation of al-kulliyyāt al-khamsa related to environmental conservation, are: First, Environment is a key word in building a religious society order. Why not, belief in the creator must begin with an introduction to the universe. Second, the environment is the basis of survival. Third, there is an appropriate punishment for perpetrators of environmental damage.

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)0.001
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score0.100

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0300.008

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.297
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJurnal Al-FanarSame topicIslamic Studies and RadicalismFrench-language works237,207