MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2144283978 · doi:10.5539/ass.v9n10p231

The Development of Bamboo Basketry According to the Base of Creative Economy of the Thai Yo Ethnic Group in Northeast Thailand

2013· article· en· W2144283978 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bangchongsak Upphapong, Sittisak Champadaeng, Suchat Sookna

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural and Artistic Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBambooNonprobability samplingHarmony (color)Ethnic groupDistribution (mathematics)GeographyBusinessSociologyPopulationMathematicsVisual artsAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Thai Yo ethnic group have their great skill to make bamboo basketworks for household use and domestic distribution but for international distribution they should develop their products. This research suggests the ways to develop the products. A qualitative research was applied to the research and research data was gathered by means of a document analysis and a field study. Research areas were selected by a purposive sampling in the area of 3 provinces located in the northeast Thailand consisting of Kalasin, Sakon Nakhon, and Nakhon Phanom. Findings indicated that a majority of Thai Yo village located in the locations where were near water resources and bamboo basketworks but the difficulties were they just mastered making them in the old way and the products they made could not respond various requirements of customers, and those products needed an improvement. The six aspects used for developing the products were these: 1) balance, 2) proportion, 3) harmony, 4) contrast, 5) rhythm and 6) emphasis. These aspects gathered from opinions of persons concerned within a concept of creative economy.The six models of bamboo basketworks were designed and made as the pilot models in order to guide the organizations concerned for developing their bamboo basketwork products to quality products.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.014

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.036
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.269 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicCultural and Artistic StudiesFrench-language works237,207