MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386602428 · doi:10.53555/sfs.v10i3.1602

Golden Threads of Tradition: The Endurance And Evolution of Muga Culture And Silk Weaving in Assam

2023· article· en· W4386602428 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Prety Rekha Narzary, S. Manimegalai, Rekha Shanmugam, B Vinothkumar, A. Suganthi, P. Radha

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Survey in Fisheries Sciences · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicSilkworms and Sericulture Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSILKWeavingSericultureMonopolyProduct (mathematics)Social scienceEngineeringEconomyGeographyAncient historyHistorySociologyEconomicsMarket economyBiologyMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Muga culture is an age old traditional practice sustaining amidst the rural folk of Assam since time immemorial. It involves lot of traditional practices and beliefs over the time and many of the time these traditional practices have proved to be successful and sustainable. Muga silk is a product of the silkworm, Antheraea assamensis Helfer is endemic to Assam province. Assam is known for creating intricate designs in handlooms and holds first position in the country with 11,11,577 number of handlooms and has 16,43,453 handloom weavers. Sualkuchi is the textile centre of Assam. At present, this golden yellow thread has evolved from a tradition to a trend. The muga silk holds monopoly in the world and has been a sector of research and development recently due to its immense potentiality to provide opportunities for national and international revenue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.027

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.161
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.115 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Survey in Fisheries SciencesSame topicSilkworms and Sericulture ResearchFrench-language works237,207