A CNN Based Approach to Classify the Folk Dances of Odisha
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Folk dances are a primordial expression of ecstasy and bliss and serve as a mode of communication. They also facilitate in keeping the people connected to their traditions as well as ancestry. Furthermore, these dances help in preserving cultural unity and their tales can often reveal a lot about the periods these dances have developed through. Mahari, Gotipua and Odissi are such folk dance forms of the eastern state of Odisha. These folk dances are on the verge of extinction owing to the reducing number of practitioners, audience, absence of documentation, and digitalization. The absence of documentation has presented a barrier to the legitimacy of folk dance as an academic field of study. This research paper intends to focus on the classification of the folk dances of Odisha such as Mahari, Gotipua and Odissi which will help them to digitize and preserve. We propose deep learning-based methods for the classification and then it can be preserved. To validate the poses and hand motions, we offer a convolutional neural network model (CNN).
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".