The Influence of Anxiety: A Study of the Postcolonial Memory and its Influence on the Indian Postcolonial Research
Bibliographic record
Abstract
My paper, is the compilation of the research findings obtained from interviews taken of various Postcolonial scholars. It spans the three generations of Postcolonial scholars including myself. It involves the study of two kinds of memory: firstly, the acquired memory or the memories that these scholars have, either from their own first hand experiences or from the information they had received from their forefathers who had the direct experience of this colonial past; secondly the collective formative memory or the memories they formed as a postcolonial nation from their school books, popular culture, film, theatre and literature. My paper aims to trace as to what extent, if at all, the effect of such colonial hangover has an impact on their research works. My paper would primarily be addressing the issue of the influence of colonial memory from three perspectives: the impact and result on the first generation Postcolonial scholars who grew up just at the brink of Indian independence; the impact and result on the second generation Postcolonial scholars who grew up during 1980’s and 90’s and who had access to the colonial memories from the oral narratives of their forefathers; the impact and result on today’s Postcolonial scholars who hardly have any colonial memories except what they had obtained from the text books and popular media. The result has some autobiographical elements as being a Postcolonial scholar myself, I have not been beyond the studies.
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 | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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".