Bibliographic record
Abstract
The mid-1980s witnessed the invention of a new musical genre in Britain consisting largely of remixes of Punjabi folk music and Bollywood music. Dubbed the new Asian dance music, it emerged as an important site for the production of South Asian diasporic identities. From the beginning, these hybridized bhangra and Hindi film remixes attracted considerable media and academic attention in Britain and, over the last two decades, they have become a global cultural phenomenon, with South Asian youth from Amsterdam to Singapore dancing to these beats in clubs, at parties, at college functions and at community gatherings. While Asian dance music returned to India through its popularization in clubs and at weddings and other events, its emblematic status in the diaspora has elided other significatory functions of dance and music in popular, social and political life in the homeland. This essay examines the meanings of bhangra and Bollywood dance in India and the diaspora by drawing on fieldwork conducted among male and female youth aged eighteen to thirty-five at bhangra and Bollywood nights, clubs, community festivals and gatherings in Bangalore, Chandigarh, Delhi, Kharagpur, Kolkata, Canberra, Melbourne, Sydney, Singapore, Stuttgart, Heidelberg, New York, Toronto and Vancouver between 2004 and 2011.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".