Brahmin, Monk, Astrologer, Medium: The Transition of the Master of Ritual of Lord Ganesha in Isan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p class="1Body">People in today's society are faced with risk in everyday life, whether the risk is immoral condition, a natural disaster, political conflicts, or economic turmoil. People in society are also struggling competitively to survive. Problems that arise now are significant and are beyond the ability to personally manage. Moreover, people are looking for security in their society in order to survive. The belief in a supernatural power fits so perfectly as a solution to these problems and seems to answer the questions that are happening right now. People have many beliefs in various god figures. "Ganesha" god, is a tremendous success god who can eliminate all obstacles. It was selected by the prosecution to unravel the lives of most people in Thailand now. This paper was written to explore a social phenomenon and to create interest in this field of research. The researchers have found that a group of people taking turns to act as a key leader in the ceremonies related to beliefs in Ganesha by diverse groups. The researchers used qualitative research methods by in a case study approach. Data was collected through in-depth interviews.</p>
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".