The Effect of Building Regulations in Non-Islamic Contexts on the Mosque Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The increase of Muslim communities in Western countries has led to an increase in Islamic places of worship.Most Western countries currently lack clear planning policies and building regulations pertaining to Islamic places of worship.Therefore, the problem of this paper is to study the impact of the various planning determinants on mosque architecture in the Western context.The research follows a descriptive-analytical approach by examining the building regulations concerned with regulating the construction of houses of worship in various Western contexts.The research contributed to presenting a set of planning and structural determinants that affect the location and design of Islamic places of worship in the Western context, including determinants related to the site, social, economic, political, and finally environmental.The extracted indicators can be adopted by those interested in drafting laws establishing Islamic places of worship.The research chose a group of samples from mosques and Islamic centers in different countries and tested the validity of these indicators on the samples.The research concluded the importance and necessity of dealing with the urban context of the site and maintaining harmony with the urban environment.Mosques and other places of worship also play an important role in developing the urban character of cities and achieving diversity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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.
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".