MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414464955 · doi:10.1017/9783959941259.010

The Recensions of the Kitāb

2024· other· en· W4414464955 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ibn Ishaq, Abū ʿUbayd

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArchaeology and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)Point (geometry)Minor (academic)Arabic literatureIslam

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Serjeant (9) bases his study of the Kitab on Ibn Ishaq's recension, remarking that Abū ʿUbayd's text is defective. Crone believes that Abū ʿUbayd's recension is later than Ibn Ishaq's. 197 However, she remarks (203 n. 16): “Ibn Hisham knew of another recension which may well have been Abū ʿUbayd's: he tells us that some have al-birr [read: al-barr] al-muḥsin for al-birr al-maḥd, which is precisely what Abū ʿUbayd has”. Abū ʿUbayd's recension has an isnād going back to Zuhrī, who died roughly a quarter of a century before Ibn Ishaq. But this should not lead to the conclusion that it is earlier than Ibn Ishaq's recension, because the latter also received it from an informant of Zuhrī's generation.198 Abū ʿUbayd's recension is indeed much shorter than Ibn Ishaq's and many clauses are missing in it; however, in some minor points it is superior. For instance, minhum in the list of Arab participants (§§4-11) appears in Abū ʿUbayd throughout and must reflect the original reading. Zuhri Zuhri's recension is preserved in Abu ʿ Ubayd's Kitab al-amwal. It is quoted from Zuhrī via two slightly different chains of transmitters: 1. At one point (166 no. 328) Abū ʿUbayd records a fragment of the Kitāb with the following isnād: Abū ʿUbayd ← ‘Abdallah b. Ṣāliḥ200 b. Sa'd201 ← ʿ Uqayl b. Khalid al-Aylī202 ← Zuhrī. 2. Abū ʿUbayd had yet another text of the Kitāb (166 no. 329) with the same isnād but for his immediate source who was not ‘Abdallāh b. Ṣāliḥ but Yahya b. ‘Abdallah b. Bukayr.203 Abū ʿUbayd gained access to Zuhri's recension in Egypt. Both his imme- diate informants, ‘Abdallāh b. Ṣāliḥ and Yaḥyā b. ‘Abdallāh b. al-Bukayr, were Egyptians. Abū ʿUbayd must have received Zuhri's recension after his arrival in Egypt with Yahya b. Maīn in 213/828.204 Having carefully compared the versions of Zuhri's recension that he received from the two informants, Abū ʿUbayd arrived at the conclusion that they were almost identical. Therefore he adduced the full text of the Kitāb (260-64 no. 518) on the authority of both ʿAbdallah b. Ṣāliḥ and Yaḥyā b. ʿAbdallah b. Bukayr (←al-Layth b. Sa'd← ʿUqayl b. Khalid ← Zuhrī).

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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.050

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0050.006
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.003

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.222
Teacher spread0.189 · 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 topicArchaeology and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207