MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416777995 · doi:10.1177/20966083251397737

Reinscribing Al-Andalus and its sciences: Transnationalism in service to a regionalized Arab–Islamic scientific legacy at Granada's <i>Parque de las Ciencias</i>

2025· article· en· W4416777995 on OpenAlexaff
Elaine McIlwraith

Bibliographic record

VenueCultures of Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHispanic-African Historical Relations
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoWestern University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeopoliticsExhibitionService (business)Content analysisEthnographyHistoriographySociology of scientific knowledge

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Science Park ( Parque de las Ciencias ) in Granada, Spain, has been host to various exhibitions of differing sizes—ranging from small exhibits to an entire pavilion—about the history of Arab–Islamic science, with a particular focus on the scientific thought and its development in Al-Andalus (or medieval ‘Muslim Spain’). This transnational scientific legacy is not often featured in science museum content around the world, despite its foundational role in the development of European sciences. For example, the Pavilion of Al-Andalus and Science, which was open from 2008 to 2016, allowed for a clear analysis of not only the universalist discourse of the sciences but also the transnational, supranational, regional and localized representations of scientific knowledge, paradigms and processes. To explore the distinctions between these framings, I review the organizational objectives of the pavilion's creator, the Fundación El Legado Andalusí , and the content of the Museum of Al-Andalus and the Sciences located on the second floor of the pavilion. The analysis focuses on several key aspects: the balance between the number of Andalusi scholars and the other Arab thinkers mentioned; the references to multiple geopolitical frames; the ways in which Andalusi scientific knowledge and contributions are interwoven into the wider Arab–Islamic history of science; and the centring of local and regional knowledge, practices, styles and techniques. The conclusions of the study are two-fold: (1) a transnational history of science can (a) reinforce a universalist discourse of science, while simultaneously (b) engaging a framework in which this scientific content and legacy can be localized; and (2) scientific knowledge and practice, like science communication, are invariably affected by other dominant forces when social, cultural and political factors beyond the realm of science are involved in the production and representation 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 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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.992
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0080.030
Scholarly communication0.0150.006
Open science0.0010.009
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.035
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.245 · 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.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCultures of ScienceSame topicHispanic-African Historical RelationsFrench-language works237,207