MAKNA DAN FUNGSI JAHANNAM MENURUT PERSPEKTIF AL-QUR’AN
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstrak \nSkripsi ini berjudul Makna dan Fungsi Jahannam Menurut Perspektif Al-Qur‟an. Penelitian bertujuan untuk mengetahui makna Jahannam serta fungsinya bagi para penghuninya. jenis penelitian ini adalah library research (penelitian perpustakaan) dengan melakukan penelitian dari berbagai literatur yang erat hubungannya dengan permasalahan yang akan diteliti. Dalam proses penelitian ini, ditemukan bahwa Jahannam adalah tempat yang disediakan untuk orang yang melampaui batas, kafir, munafik, zalim, syirik, sombong, mengikuti langkah setan, sesat dan buruk amalannya, mendustakan adanya neraka itu sendiri, menumpahkan darah orang muslim secara sengaja, ingkar, hubb al-dunya, keluar dari barisan perang, menumpuk harta dan enggan mengeluarkannya di jalan Allah. Setelah masuk neraka, maka mereka kekal di dalamnya, lalu mendapatkan azab yang tiada henti, bahkan bertambah setiap saatnya, selalu dalam keadaan dahaga dan kepanasan, serta diberi tikar dan selimut dari api. Mereka menyesal dan memohon pertolongan agar dikeluarkan dari panasnya neraka, tapi penyesalan mereka sudah tidak berguna lagi. \nKata kunci: Jahannam, makna, fungsi.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.116 | 0.033 |
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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".