Analysing The "Festival les Cultures du Monde" of Gannat as a site for celebrating cultural diversity!
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Over the last few decades (especially since 1970s) international folklore festivals across the globe have been showcasing, promoting, publicizing and safeguarding traditional cultures (specifically dance, music and art) from different parts of the world. Prominently, UNESCO (United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization) supported organizations such as CIOFF (International Council of Organizations of Folklore Festivals and Folk Art), IOV (International Organisation of Folk Art) and CID (International Dance Council) has been focused in terms of the promotion and protection of folk and cultural heritage. A significant number of these international folklore festivals are organized by various cities, towns and villages across the world, for example, Festival Les Cultures du Monde in Gannat, France, Parade Brunssum in Brunssum, Netherlands, Mondial Des Cultures in Drummondville, Canada and WOMAD in Adelaide, Australia. On an average ten to twenty folk music and dance groups are invited from various parts of the world to participate in these festivals that run for several days/weeks, thereby not only providing an opportunity to the groups to showcase their culture, but also, to mingle with other folk groups and local people. Utilising first hand interviews with the organizers of the festival, folk group members and volunteers conducted during the 39th edition of Les Cultures du Monde - the international folklore festival of Gannat in France 2012, this research paper will examine, how the Gannat festival has become a venue for celebrating cultural diversity and in what ways it attempts to promote and safeguard the intangible cultural heritage.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".