Burma's Modern Monks: The Politics of the Sangha's Pro-Democracy Movement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Late in the summer of 2007, hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets of major cities across Burma to protest their government.1 Nearly the entire ranks of the country's monkhood embarked upon a religious boycott of the state's armed forces, walking past the Burmese military with upturned alms bowls, despite the grave consequences they all knew they would incur. The government crack down was notoriously bloody. The protest, known as the Saffron Revolution, neither promoted social reform, nor rallied a successful international response against the ruling junta, which calls itself the State Peace and Development Council (SPDC) (Selth, 2008). Three years later, the resistance movement has faded from world headlines and the SPDC has strengthened their power over government while effectively barring opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi from partaking in upcoming elections. Burma is at a crossroads, not in the least because the elections slated for the end of 2010 are widely seen as sham elections intended to solidify the military's position in power, which will test the resolve of the pro-democracy movement.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.020 | 0.012 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".