Oleps’ Traditional Beliefs of the Clouded Leopard the Top Predator of Bhutan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Oleps are the first human inhabitants of Bhutan and the country’s last remaining hunter-gatherers. We conducted a preliminary study into the meaning of the traditional Bhutanese saying tog-ge-teng-nang-gong; gong-ge-teng-nang-thee (Ole) and tag-ge-ta-lay-gung; gung ge-ta-lay-theb (Dzongkha). Tag in Dzongkha refers to Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris) and gung refers to clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa). The saying describes the existence of a species, which Oleps people believe is the clouded leopard, that is superior to the apex predator the tiger. The saying is further elaborated as gung-gi-ta-lay-theb (Dzongkha), which means that a skilled human hunter is superior to the clouded leopard. We used semi-structured interviews to ask 19 Oleps people to explain this traditional saying and narrate the beliefs embedded in it. Participants related the saying to their views of the clouded leopard, and we explored how these views might influence the current conservation status of clouded leopards living in the Oleps’ locality. Our interviews showed that Oleps revered and respected clouded leopards, but they also viewed them and other wild cats as harmful to livestock, and some expressed a desire to acquire clouded leopard pelts or to keep them as pets. Indigenous knowledge and beliefs are important to consider in the development of a conservation plan for clouded leopards. We recommend that Oleps’ sayings and stories be documented for posterity and that conservationists continue to engage in dialog with Oleps people to better understand the effects clouded leopards and other wild cats have on their livelihoods.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".