MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4307134908 · doi:10.1186/s43238-022-00070-0

Analyses and architectural typology of preserved traditional mosques in the old city of Herat in Afghanistan: the case of Quzzat Quarter

2022· article· en· W4307134908 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ghulam Mohammad Asim, Hajime Shimizu

Bibliographic record

VenueBuilt Heritage · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Architectural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of the Ryukyus
KeywordsTypologyQuarter (Canadian coin)Period (music)ArchitectureAncient historyHistoryArchaeologyArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The study aims to analyse the architectural typology and determine the period of construction for the preserved traditional mosques of the Quzzat Quarter in the Old City of Herat (known as the Pearl of Khorasan). Twenty-nine mosques are located in the area, three of which are modern and 26 are traditional. Twelve out of the 26 traditional mosques still exist and have preserved their traditional landscape. Using analogy to analyse water cisterns and mosques, we determine when each mosque was developed and establish the period of development for each structure. Further analyses are carried out on the edifices’ architectural details. Architectural analyses and mosque typologies suggest that five buildings were built before the Timurid dynasty; two were built during the Timurid dynasty (1370−1507 CE); and one was built after the Timurid dynasty. Two mosques incorporating elements from different periods are counted as exceptions, and the remaining two are considered to have been built during transitional periods.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.063

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.006
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.138
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.151 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations7
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBuilt HeritageSame topicHistorical and Architectural StudiesFrench-language works237,207