Bibliographic record
Abstract
Religion is the other name of faith to which all the responsibilities are related. It is an inevitable power that plays an important role in rectifying our action. Religion is a force to be believed in and by trusting in it. Life is lived according to its order and purpose religion is not the name of particular faith. There are many religion in the world which are different to each other when we dis cuss general concept of religion we should not mix them each other. When we talk about Islam, we should avoid associate many wrong concepts to Islam without research. According to Islam “my prayers, all my act of worship, my living, my dying, all for the Lord of the worlds who has no partner, and this order has been given to me and I am the first to obey Him”. Goodness and badness in food, drink and clothing are under religion and the tendencies are beneficial which grow under religion. Religion has given us the concept of punishment and reward. Science is a method of research by which we start from a known facts and events. Ultimately, we make a faith or hypothesis that some facts are existing. This means is un biased. On other side Science is research and exploration. This mean of research is flawed and deficient. Achievements in scientific knowledge and disciplines show that no single man can remember the whole knowledge alone, for science education it is necessary to exclude all unnecessary topics and details in it. Science education should aim at prevention of evil and search of virtue. It seems that science or science education has no connection to ethics, Moreover, the religion of Islam is a religion in which the teaching of ethics is also found and it helps in the teaching of science.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.980 | 0.983 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".