Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study is on concept and thoughts of Saints and so-called Saints of knowledge. The analysis of Saints and So-called Saints’ thoughts and their definitions have been given in the essay. Saint is devotee of knowledge, and bears hardships and difficulties willingly for the sake of seeking knowledge. The basic condition for becoming saint is to seek knowledge. Saints’ knowledge helps to get Allah’s willingness and the target of it is to have recognition of Allah. Saint considers knowledge and action complementary for each other and saves his energies and stocks to spend on objectiveless and profitless knowledge. He becomes loving to Allah due to its intrinsic and extrinsic benefits. However, so called saint always targets his personal and material benefits. He prospers his life on the name of his predecessors. A lot of difference is found in the character and objectives of both partners. The person, who is embodiment of knowledge and follows the character of his predecessors, deserves to be a religious guide for Allah’s creation. Therefore, saints remained away from the so-called saints, bad scholars, and claimant of Allah’s recognition without piety.
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) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.952 | 0.930 |
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".