The Role of the Bonding Strategy in the Identity of Islamic Architecture
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary Islamic production varies in its connection or separation from its Islamic identity, as the models varied within the single functional style, as an instance Mosque architecture, shows more than one form and characteristic in how it represent the principles and values that must be available within its spaces, but despite the diversity, there are lines or bonds connect this product with the basis from which architecture was launched, thus the research presents the strategy of bonding by linking the product with its origins and its role in showing the identity of Islamic architecture albeit this representation depends on the type of bonging, which the research presents in two types: a differential and a consensual bonging. In both types, the identity appears on one hand as well as the creative aspects of the production, which invoke a new language, and here we should mention the knowledge gap in lacking enough studies that define the role of bonding between the contemporary Islamic product and its original and basic sources due to diversity of presenting the products and the means of dealing with it in addition to its role in providing continuity via time and space. Thus, the Islamic production must be identified via its connection with its roots which provide its Islamic identity and manifest its character as an Islamic production. In that meaning, the study propose bonding as a strategy enables connection with dynamic and statistic, while the dynamic works on revive the intellect through a new generative form, the static represent both intellectual and formal revive that entails a high symbolic formal Islamic architecture. the research also mentioned that the importance of bonding strategy manifests the importance of its present in the contemporary Islamic production partially rather in total form, and its adaptation varies depending on its presentation by the designer more than being as objective aspects in control.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".