MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311680438

A CROSS-CULTURAL EXAMINATION OF THE EXPRESSIVE CULTURE OF TURKISH-SPEAKING ALEVI/BEKTASHI AND ALEVI/BABAI (BOBAI) COMMUNITIES IN THE EASTERN RHODOPE MOUNTAINS OF SOUTHERN BULGARIA: IN SEARCH OF ORIGINS AND PARALLELS WITH TURKISH ALEVIS/ BEKTASHIS AND TAHTACIS

2012· article· en· W4311680438 on OpenAlexaff
Irene Markoff

Bibliographic record

VenueDergiPark (Istanbul University) · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTurkishParallelsLinguisticsEngineeringPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Genel olarak Alevi kategorisi altında sınıflandırılan Bulgaristan’daki heteredoks Türk toplulukları, öncelikli olarak Kuzey Bulgaristan’ın Deliorman bölgesinde ve Güney Bulgaristan’ın Rhodope Dağlarında bulunurlar. 2001 yılında kaydedilen istatistikler Bulgaristan’da 53.000 heteredoks Müslüman bulunduğunu göstermektedir (Mikov 2005). Bu senkretistik topluluklar İmam Ali ve 12imama olan bağlılıklarından dolayı Şii diye adlandırılırlar. Ayrıca bu topluluklar, 16. yüzyılda liderlerinin aşırı Şii inançlarını destekleyen Şah İsmail’in Savafi Türkmen ordusu eliti tarafından giyilen 12 katlı türbanı ifade eden ve Alevilik için daha önceden de kullanılan “Kızılbaş” kavramıyla da tanınmaktadırlar. Bunun dışında bu topluluklar Bektaşi (Bulgaristan’da var olan Çelebi ve Babağan kolları ile Bektaşi derviş ocaklarını ifade eder) ve Babai (Bulgaristan’daki Otman Baba kolunu ifade eder) olarak da isimlendirilmektedirler (de Jong 1993). Düşman çevrelerde gerçek kimliğini maskelemek olarak bilinen takiyye pratiği, Anadolu ve Balkanlarda ki bu tarz tarikatlar için genel bir stratejidir. Buralarda diğerlerinden (Sünnilerden) kaynaklanan baskı her zaman var olmuşturve devlet yetkilileri tarafından uygulanan ağır tedbirlerle ve zulümlerle sonuçlanmıştır (Markoff 2002).

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.780

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.242
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDergiPark (Istanbul University)Same topicLinguistics and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207