Boon Phawet: A Comparative Study of a Phu Tai, Tai-Lao and Kaleung Religious Ceremony in North-eastern Thailand
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This is a qualitative investigation utilizing survey, observation, interview and focus group discussion as research tools. The aims of the paper are to assess the current state of the Boon Phawet ceremony, compare the customs between Phu Tai, Tai-Lao and Kaleung ethnic groups and analyse what they reveal about culture and society. The results show that the principles of Boon Phawet in all three groups are similar. The ceremony is held in the fourth month according to the traditional North-eastern social code of heet 12 kong 14. It is a religious ceremony to pay respect to Phra Malai, an arhat who descended to hell to ease suffering. The main components of the ceremony are a Phawet fabric parade, the Tet Mahachat sermon and a Kan Lon parade. There are a number of group-specific particularities, including the use of elephants in the parade of the Kaleung group. Problems with Boon Phawet revolve around a lack of active inheritance and care from the younger generations. For the continuation of Boon Phawet traditions, a conservation model must be determined that appeals to modern society.
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".