MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W968245591 · doi:10.3989/alqantara.2013.010

Saladino y las campañas ayyubíes en el Magreb

2013· article· es· W968245591 on OpenAlex
Amar S. Baadj

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueAl-Qanṭara · 2013
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican Studies and Geopolitics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAncient historyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Este artículo trata sobre la conquista de Libia y Túnez por Saladino (Salah al-Din) y los Ayyubíes en las décadas de 1170 y 1180. En primer lugar se presenta una reconstrucción de las campanas dirigidas por los mamelucos ayyubíes Sharaf al-Din Qaraqush e Ibn Qaratikin en Libia y de la guerra entre los almohades y los Ayyubíes en Ifriqiya (Túnez) basada en fuentes primarias relevantes. A continuación se estudia en qué medida Saladino fue el responsable de estas expediciones militares y, finalmente, se discute el motivo de dichas expediciones. Se llega a la conclusión de que Saladino y sus emires invadieron el Magreb con el fin de controlar los puntos septentrionales de los ejes oriental y central de las rutas comerciales que cruzaban el Sahara y con esto lograr tener acceso al oro de África Occidental que pasaba a lo largo de estas rutas. Esto ocurrió en un momento en que había una gran escasez de metales preciosos en Egipto y Saladino necesitaba efectivo para pagar sus guerras con los cruzados en Palestina.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.385
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.007

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.310
Teacher spread0.300 · 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