MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412449448 · doi:10.36253/fh-3152

Embodying Prosperity

2025· article· en· W4412449448 on OpenAlexaff
Pramila Choudhary

Bibliographic record

VenueFashion Highlight · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsProsperityPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper explores India’s agropastoral desi oon (wool) textile traditions and their significance in embodying prosperity, focusing on hand-spun and handwoven Pattu textiles. Pattu is a multifunctional textile—used as a shawl, skirt, blanket, mat, or rain cover—valued for its durability and warmth in desert climates. The word “Pattu” derives from patti, meaning narrow-width fabric, woven on pit treadle looms (Khaddi) (Rustagi, 2021). Two narrow strips (pattis) are stitched together to form a blanket or shawl (Munshi et al., 1992). Grounded in Indigenous and Local Ecological Knowledge (ILEK), Pattu’s making involves intergenerational hand-spinning, weaving, and embroidery practices. These textiles not only reflect the ecological rhythms of desert life but also sustain a meaningful relationship between communities and their environment. Crafted from locally sourced desi oon, Pattu embodies both ecological sustainability and cultural identity (Jaitly, 1990). By exploring embedded skills, seasonal rhythms, and collaborative production, this paper highlights how Pattu supports rural livelihoods, preserves intangible cultural heritage, and fosters community resilience. In an era of climate crisis and industrialized fashion, Pattu offers a culturally rooted, sustainable alternative that reconnects people, place, and practice.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.022

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0070.027
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0010.012
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.020
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFashion HighlightSame topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207