MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4399732070 · doi:10.22148/001c.116223

Racio-national Imaginary and Discursive Formation of Arabo-Islamic Identity in al-Manār and al-Risālah: A Topic Modeling Study

2024· article· en· W4399732070 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Eid Mohamed, Talaat F Mohamed

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Cultural Analytics · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicComputational and Text Analysis Methods
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersQatar National Research FundFonds National de la Recherche LuxembourgQatar Foundation
KeywordsConceptualizationIntelligentsiaIslamThe ImaginaryModernityIdentity (music)PoliticsSociologyGender studiesNational identityReligious studiesMedia studiesLinguisticsPolitical scienceLawPsychoanalysisPhilosophyTheologyAestheticsPsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article focuses on the dynamics of culture, language, and race as integral to the discourse on Pan-Islamist/Pan-Arabist national identification in Egypt during an era of drastic change in the Egyptian political and social spheres that set the stage for the current century that followed. Our approach draws on computational tool of topic modeling to probe relevant thematic discussions on the” conceptualization of race, language, culture, and identity by leading Arab-Muslim intelligentsia at a foundational moment that paved the way for Arab Nahḍah (modernity). Specifically, this analysis is meant to trace the intellectual development in the writings of Muḥammad Rashid Riḍā’s (1865-1935), which appeared in the magazine he edited, al-Manār ('The Lighthouse', 1898-1935), and those of Aḥmad Ḥasan al-Zayyāt’s (1885-1968), editor of al-Risālah (`The Messageʼ, 1933-1953), also a weekly magazine, both published in Cairo, Egypt. The study concludes that both figures sought to galvanize a largely hybridized Islamist/Arabist discourse as manifested in the clusteral paradigms of modelled topics.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.029

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0040.004
Scholarly communication0.0070.007
Open science0.0010.003
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 head0.055
GPT teacher head0.432
Teacher spread0.377 · 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 designSimulation or modeling
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

Citations2
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Cultural AnalyticsSame topicComputational and Text Analysis MethodsFrench-language works237,207