MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4375827828 · doi:10.56529/mpr.v1i2.65

The Social and Political Life of Armenians in the Holy Land

2022· article· en· W4375827828 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ararat Kostanian

Bibliographic record

VenueMuslim Politics Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJewish and Middle Eastern Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsArmenianPoliticsAncient historyMiddle EastQuarter (Canadian coin)Ethnic groupJudaismPalestineGeographyGenizahHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A Palestinian Armenian: The Intertwine between the Social and the Political. Varsen Aghabekian. Dar al-Kalima University Press (2021)The Armenian presence in the Middle East, and in the Holy City in particular, goes back thousands of years. Armenians’ presence in the territory dates back to 420AD when they participated in the construction of St James (Sourp Hagop) Convent. By the sixth century, they had constructed sixty-six religious institutions in Jerusalem. Currently, they still play a big role in the social and religious life in the Holy Land, where the Armenian Quarter stands as the one of the essential religious and ethnic pillars of the old city next to the Muslim, Christian, and Jewish quarters. The Holy Land refers to Palestinian territory and some parts of Israel, an area roughly located between the Mediterranean Sea and the Eastern Bank of the Jordan River. But this book is not solely about the history of the Armenians’ presence in Palestine. As reflected in its title, The Intertwine Between the Social and the Political, this book is about the past and the present of the Armenians of Palestine with implications about their future role in Palestinian nation-building.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.043

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.071
GPT teacher head0.361
Teacher spread0.290 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMuslim Politics ReviewSame topicJewish and Middle Eastern StudiesFrench-language works237,207