MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386391078 · doi:10.5430/elr.v12n2p28

Al-Andalus as a Symbol of Islamic Religious Tolerance

2023· article· en· W4386391078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Khaled Suleiman Al-Khalafat

Bibliographic record

VenueEnglish Linguistics Research · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHispanic-African Historical Relations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIslamCustodiansPersecutionWorshipState (computer science)RighteousnessFaithReligious studiesLawReligious persecutionEthnic groupReignSymbol (formal)Political scienceTurkishSociologyHistoryTheologyPhilosophyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Research examines the history of religious tolerance and coexistence between Muslims and Christians in Al-Andalus (Iberian Peninsula) since Muslims first arrived in the Peninsula, and how Muslims, during their reign, fostered and promoted justice, equality and tolerance among Andalusian society's diverse demographic segments. Furthermore, the Research addresses the question of how Muslims dealt with Dhimmis (non-Muslims living in an Islamic State with legal protection), granting them full rights, including the freedom to profess their faith and worship in their churches and temples, as well as permit them to construct new churches away from religious persecution? In fact, Muslims went far than that, as they participated in Christian religious feasts and social events. Moreover, the Research draws on vivid examples that demonstrate Muslims' righteousness in ruling an Andalusian community, which included Muslims, Christians, Jews, and people of various ethnicities. It also highlights how the aforementioned ethnicities were granted complete freedom to innovate in all realms of innovation; therefore, there were physicians, philosophers, poets, engineers, writers, diplomats, translators, and custodians of State secrets among them.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.056
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.883
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.056
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.002

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 head0.352
Teacher spread0.280 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEnglish Linguistics ResearchSame topicHispanic-African Historical RelationsFrench-language works237,207