Contemporary Adivasi poetry in Maharashtra: A conversational voice of dissent
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The process of bringing indigenous voices at the international level started around the 1940s. But the results could be apparent around the ’60s and the ’70s. There emerged an international body called World Council for Indigenous Peoples in the year 1975. It was a consequence of the conference of the indigenous peoples held in Canada. Due to this conference, the contacts between the indigenous people became truly trans-national. It gave indigenous minorities a platform to share their experiences and put forth their ideas and thoughts about their status. The participation in such conferences by the indigenous people created a new awareness among these communities that paved the way for the Indigenous Literature in particular. Hence, the 1960s and the ’70s are assumed to be the emerging years of the indigenous literatures in the world. The term Aborigine communities is also one of the terms used to address the indigenous people. For the last fifty years, the indigenous literary figures have been contributing a lot to expose the malaise of exploitation and its brutal effects on their communities and cultures. The present research article intends to explore major concerns of Indigenous poetry written in Maharashtra and its distinctive poetic form used to communicate these concerns. In India, in the present scenario where religious, communal and caste based identities have become more sensitive, where violence is erupted due to the ethnic identities of the people it is ingenious to listen to the voices and perspective of these communities.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".