Bibliographic record
Abstract
Exit God: Border Crossings in Jīrṇoddhāra Procedure Jīrṇoddhāra, the disposal and replacement of an old idol or temple, necessitates the temporary departure of the deity from that place. The ritual for this departure will be followed as it is reported in two texts: the Piṅgalāmata and the Tantrasamuccaya. The Piṅgalāmata is useful in understanding the process of jīrṇoddhāra: the text defines the process, explains the need for it, rationalises the ritual procedure, and gives a brief account of it. The description in the Tantrasamuccaya gives finer detail on how the procedure should be carried out. Unlike other records of the subject, that of the Tantrasamuccaya does not glide over the most important moments of transition for the deity, but stops to consider them in depth, giving attention to his displacement in terms of saṅkocana (contraction), niṣkrāmaṇa (expulsion), and sūtracchidā (the severing of the cord). While this pair of texts offers the material in contrasting forms, the two sets of teaching are found to be congruent one with the other, making them companion pieces that give us a good view into what it means to invite the deity to leave. We find that in order for the deity to cross concentric borders to leave his base, the human ritual officiant must make a crossing too, and, indeed, the borders themselves will be moved around.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.017 | 0.002 |
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.
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".