Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le djihad contemporain est souvent perçu soit comme la négation pure du concept de « souveraineté de l’État », soit comme la recherche d’une version islamique de la souveraineté de l’État par la mise en oeuvre de la charia. Au contraire, cet article montre comment les djihads transnationaux en particulier mettent l’accent sur une logique de solidarité entre les communautés islamiques sans nécessairement rejeter en bloc l’autorité de l’État-nation. Il met au jour cette logique de solidarité sur le plan théorique au moyen d’une analyse de la théologie politique du théoricien du djihad palestinien ‘Abd Allah ‘Azzam, tant dans ses écrits juridiques que dans ceux portant sur les miracles dans le djihad en Afghanistan. C’est la solidarité, plutôt que la souveraineté, qui éclaire les difficultés et les dilemmes quotidiens des participants au djihad, comme le démontrent les débats entre les combattants du djihad arabes lors de la guerre de 1992-1995 en Bosnie-Herzégovine au sujet des règles islamiques régissant les mariages avec des femmes bosniaques.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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.
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".