The Citizenship Amendment Bill, 2019 and Its Impact Over State of Assam
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article Author critically analyze the citizenship amendment bill, 2019. Citizenship is legal relationship between a people with the state. This amendment is in issue because in this “religion” is criteria for granting citizenship. Government is allowing the citizenship to illegal migrants of six communities (Hindu, Sikh, Christian, Jain, Parsi and Buddhist) from three neighboring countries (Afghanistan, Pakistan and Bangladesh). This bill has been criticized in the house and outside the house. Many claimed that this bill is brought by the government for alluring the majority vote-bank in near general election. The north east region especially state of Assam is going to be adversely affected by this bill, because it will significantly affect the demography, culture and social environment. Consequently there is great protest and uproar against this bill in Assam and North East region. When India is facing the problem of population explosion and the national resources are not enough even for the citizens, this bill looks unreasonable because certainly it will increase the burden of the country.. The exclusion of Muslims is greatly criticized, one parliamentarian during the discussion over this bill said that this government cannot run India like Israel. This bill is also against the basis structure of the constitution that is Secularism. One organization from Assam has filed a writ petition against this bill in Supreme Court as it is unconstitutional. This particular bill is also against the ASSAM ACCORD, 1985, and even inside the government some members and the allies parties of government are against this bill. The author analyzed the social condition of Assam and the consequences of this bill over the state of Assam.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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".