Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nigosian (Univ. of Toronto) has written a remarkable book. Though one might quibble over the omission of any meaningful discussion of fiqh (at least it's in the glossary) or object to glib treatment of some rather controversial topics (the influence of the Night Journey and Ascension literature on Dante is not as cut and dried as the author repeatedly asserts), this panoramic overview of Islam is refreshing in its conciseness and logical order of presentation. Succinct discussions of complicated topics, such as the origins and development of Shi'ism, the causes of Ottoman decline, the phenomenon of jihad, moral and social behavior of Muslims, women's religious duties, Islamic feminism, and observances and festivals, all merit especial praise. In addition, there is a seminal theological comparison of Islam to Christianity (normally not included in a work such as this), a discussion that does not gloss over important differences or sugarcoat the rough edges that religious traditions often exhibit. There are a few misstatements of fact (the third surah of the Qur'an is not entitled Ali Imran). The occasional typographical errors, appearing mostly in relation to the author's own system of transliteration, are relatively minor. Summing Up: Highly recommended. General readers and lower-level undergraduates.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it