MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2246341504

Bengali immigrants and renovation of the administrative structure of princely state Tripura: An analytical study

2012· article· en· W2246341504 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Nilanjan De

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational journal of research in social sciences · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSouth Asian Studies and Conflicts
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBengaliBENGALColonialismImmigrationState (computer science)West bengalWitnessAncient historyQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryGeographySociologySocioeconomicsMathematicsPolitical scienceLawArchaeologyPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Movements of immigrants were not a new phenomenon for the state Tripura. Tripura began to witness the flow of immigrants’ right from the last quarter of the 19th century and before her amalgamation, she witnessed a large number of immigrants especially from Colonial Bengal. The close affinity between the Colonial Bengal and Hill Tipperah caused the movements of the people from one place to another. Whether the rulers of Tripura whole-heartedly wanted to make a close affinity with Colonial Bengal is a matter of long discussion, but it is true that they had to admit the Bengalis into their territory. Now what were the reasons for which the rulers of Tripura pulled the Bengali immigrants especially from the educated sections from their state of origin? The present study is made to find out analytically the reasons behind those educated Bengali immigrants who immigrated into the Princely state of Tripura.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.004
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.309
GPT teacher head0.558
Teacher spread0.249 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational journal of research in social sciencesSame topicSouth Asian Studies and ConflictsFrench-language works237,207