Development Model of Lifestyles after the Success of Mor Lam’s Career
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Problem Statement: As northeastern styled singer, or mor lam have a long role to play in society and culture. Mor lam relates to Isan people’s way of life. The objectives of the study were to examine the historical background, the current circumstances and problems of lifestyles and development model of lifestyles after they had achieved highly in career in Isan, Thailand. Approach: The research was carried out in 5 Provinces in Isan or Northeastern Thailand: Khon Kaen, Udon Thani, Ubon Ratchatani, Maha Sarakham, and Roi Et. The instruments used were a basic survey, participant observations, interviews, and focused-group discussions. The 100 informants were key, casual, and general ones respectively. The data analysis was, based on objectives and triangulation technique, done descriptively. Results: Historically, mor lam was basically evolved from four sources: storytelling, exchange of Phaya, soul comforting, and preaching. The storytelling often proceeded with the language of prose and was related to Phaya. There were four types of mor lam: traditional singing, verse singing, dancing with singing, and group singing. Mor lam had roles to play in society as reflected by verses, and singing included their thoughs, way of life, religion, tradition and belief. Ten singers (mor lam) were chosen for the study. They were Khen Dalao, Ratri Srivilai, Thongcharoen Dalao, Bunchuang Denduang, Chaweewan Dumnern, Por Chalard Noi Songserm, Paiboon Siang Thong, Buaphan Daokanong, Ranjuan Duangden, and Krissana Boonsan. All of the mor lam came from rice farming families. They went into professional singers with a passion and received training from parents and relatives. Subsequently, they were trained by famous singing instructors. Based on their expertise in singing, they all became successful, famous and professional singers or mor lam in Thailand.Currently, most mor lam or traditional singers of all types had to put a lot of effort into staying alive in their singing and entertainment business due to fast technological change and development, such as, media and internet. The public and audiences therefore turned to media and internet for entertainment. To stay on the job, many mor lams had to invest, almost limitless on their singing business. Some mor lam had to reduce the size of their own singing groups and spending.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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".