MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2506966447 · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139173148.006

From Newly Discovered Margins: Ray's Responses to the Center

2000· book-chapter· en· W2506966447 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2000
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicPhilosophy, Science, and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCenter (category theory)GeographyHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

To the late but perennially alive Larry Schwartz, who loved India and Ray; Cuthbert Lethbridge, the finest individual Ray archivist; and the late Jason Fernandes, for fun-filled M.A. “Ray” Days at The Aakashvani Introduction Ray's humanism was endorsed by the bhadralok “center” (i.e., the Bengali middle class) to which he belonged. However, as the climate of India in general and Bengal in particular deteriorated in the 1990s on all fronts – political, cultural, social – and as this deterioration was felt in an everyday experience of “marginality,” Ray was forced into a search for an alternative authenticity to the notions of bhadralok centrality. He started off by questioning the powerful fundamental beliefs of Hinduism, sanctioned by conniving bhadralok bureaucrats and fanatical religious zealots in Ganashatru (An Enemy of the People , 1989). This start was not auspicious, however, because the character chosen to question these “centrist” tendencies was not very convincing. Critic Asoke S. Viswanathan identifies accurately the confusions in Ray's characterization of Dr. Ashoke Gupta: “Where indeed is the cinematic isolation of the good doctor struggling to convince an insensitive, brute majority of the dangers of blind faith?” The characterization lacked conviction because the doctor's isolation emerged from living in an idealist's fool paradise. The same complaint may be leveled against Ray's depiction of Ananda Majumdar, the ailing father and founder of Anandnagar in his next film, Shakha Proshaka : Both men work in the public sphere of contemporary India, yet both seem completely unaware of the excesses that are ubiquitous there.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.051

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0130.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.008
Open science0.0010.007
Research integrity0.0040.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.002

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.189
Teacher spread0.156 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicPhilosophy, Science, and HistoryFrench-language works237,207