MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404621983 · doi:10.5539/ach.v17n1p1

“Facts about the Dēnkard” along with “The Review of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti from the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask from the 9th Book of Dēnkard”

2024· article· en· W4404621983 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Poorchista Goshtasbi Ardakany

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Culture and History · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAncient Near East History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The“Dēnkard” is one of the most important religious books related to Zoroastrian religion, which is written in Pahlavi script and language. This book is written based on the Avesta and its interpretations and the sayings of the predecessors. In this research, firstly, materials about the Dēnkard and its final authors are examined, which contain important points and new results. After that, the chapters Yasna Haptaŋhāiti from the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask from the ninth book of the Dēnkard are examined and analyzed in order to determine to what extent their contents have been taken from the Avestan text of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti and its Zand. In the findings of the research, it was found that because the final author of the Dēnkard did not have any source of the Avesta and Zand at the time of writing the book, he has interpreted the Avesta using his intelligence and memory. Also, according to the findings of the research, it was found that in addition to the content that has been taken from the Avestan text of the Yasna Haptaŋhāiti, some content from other parts of the Avesta have been also written in these two chapters of the Waršt-Mānsar Nask and Baγ Nask. Because, sometimes due to the confusion of the final author of the Dēnkard, who has confused one verse with another verse, and sometimes for further explanation and interpretation, the interpretations of other parts of the Avesta have been written in these two chapters. In fact, the author of the Dēnkard wrote these contents from other parts of the Avesta in these chapters as a guest. This article contains research materials and methods that have been discovered for the first time in the world by its author.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.038

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.003

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.183
Teacher spread0.168 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Culture and HistorySame topicAncient Near East HistoryFrench-language works237,207