MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2739905070

LIFE SKETCH OF LALA HARDAYAL: THE FOUNDER OF GHADAR MOVEMENT

2017· article· en· W2739905070 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Raj G. Kumar

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Education and Research Journal · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicIndian History and Philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEmigrationOppressionIndependence (probability theory)HatredImmigrationVisionPridePrejudice (legal term)Political scienceIdeologySociologyGender studiesPolitical economyLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Ghadar movement stood for the revolutionary overthrow of the British rule in India. It had two pronged strategy: to expose the racial discrimination of the American, Canadian and the British Government towards Indians and to evoke national pride for independence of India. Those who worked for it were Punjabi immigrants, mostly Sikhs, small and middle peasants at home, working as labourers in farms and factories in the U.S.A. and Canada. Their emigration was a response to economic frustration and oppression at home. In the foreign land, they were treated as slave. They faced racial discrimination there and treated badly in respect of housing and payment. In America, colour prejudice grew against them. This treatment developed feelings of hatred and repulsion among them and they started organizing themselves into some societies. A small number of educated revolutionaries played a significant role both in the evolution of the movement and direction given to it. Most important ideologue among them was Lala Hardayal. His interaction with the Indian emigrants aroused in him visions of organizing a mass revolutionary movement. He became the guiding force for the Indians, living in North America and gave direction to the already developing movement among the immigrants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.837
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.189
GPT teacher head0.418
Teacher spread0.230 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
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
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Education and Research JournalSame topicIndian History and PhilosophyFrench-language works237,207