A Dynamic Atlas of Persian Poetic Symbolism: Families, Fields, and the Historical Rewiring of Meaning

Kourosh Shahnazari, Seyed Moein Ayyoubzadeh, Mohammadali Keshtparvar · Apr 1, 2026 · Citations: 0

Open arXiv Find Implementation RSS feed Shortlist (0)

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Read the full paper before copying any benchmark, metric, or protocol choices.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

Persian poetry is often remembered through recurrent symbols before it is remembered through plot. Wine vessels, gardens, flames, sacred titles, bodily beauty, and courtly names return across centuries, yet computational work still tends to flatten this material into isolated words or broad document semantics. That misses a practical unit of organization in Persian poetics: related forms travel as families and gain force through recurring relations. Using a corpus of 129,451 poems, we consolidate recurrent forms into traceable families, separate imagistic material from sacred and courtly reference, and map their relations in a multi-layer graph. The symbolic core is relatively sparse, the referential component much denser, and the attachment zone between them selective rather than diffuse. Across 11 Hijri-century bins, some families remain widely distributed, especially Shab (Night), Ruz (Day), and Khaak (Earth). Wine vessels, garden space, flame, and lyric sound strengthen later, while prestige-coded and heroic-courtly vocabulary is weighted earlier. Century-specific graphs show change in arrangement as well as membership. Modularity rises, cross-scope linkage declines, courtly bridges weaken, and sacred bridges strengthen. Hub positions shift too: Kherqe (Sufi Robe) gains late prominence, Farkhondeh {Blessed} and Banafsheh (Violet) recede, and Saaghar (Wine Cup) stays central across the chronology. In this corpus, Persian symbolism appears less as a fixed repertory than as a long-lived system whose internal weights and connections change over time.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.
The abstract does not clearly describe the evaluation setup.
The abstract does not clearly name benchmarks or metrics.

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

Background context only.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Weak / implicit signal

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 15%

If you are doing eval pipeline work, start here:

Human Eval Hub LLM-as-Judge Hub Pairwise Preference Hub Tool-Use Eval Hub

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.