La complexité des identités autochtones en Inde. Croisement de l’auto-identification et des réalités juridiques à travers le processus de tribalisation chez les Kalbeliya du Rajasthan
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article explore la notion d’auto-identification tribale en Inde, mettant en avant le processus de « tribalisation ». À travers l’exemple des Kalbeliya du Rajasthan, il examine comment certaines communautés indiennes se perçoivent comme tribales en raison de caractéristiques sociales et culturelles malgré un statut officiel juridique différent. Ce texte décortique les facteurs internes et externes qui influencent cette auto-identification, tels que les noms de caste et les similitudes avec les communautés tribales ou associées à la tribalité dans le pays. En fin de compte, l’article illustre la complexité des identités autochtones en Inde, enracinées dans des contextes historiques, sociaux, culturels et économiques diversifiés, tout en soulignant la dynamique complexe des interactions identitaires façonnées par l’héritage colonial du pluralisme juridique.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".