Bibliographic record
Abstract
The physical representation of the Buddha (Siddhartha Gautama) is characterized by some thirty-two uncommon attributes that are described in the Lalitavistara as the marks of a great man. The origin of these attributes, whether they are actual physical observations, of symbolic origin or a combination is unclear. In various art forms depicting the Buddha, he is usually shown with some but not all of these attributes. We have examined the origin of these physical attributes, by considering what is known of similarly described physical variations in humans (both congenital and acquired) and by examining the Sanskrit medical texts, such as the Sushruta-Samhita and the Charaka-Samhita, for descriptions of these and similar attributes. It is plausible that the observation of most of these thirty-two uncommon physical attributes might well have been accumulated over centuries as a result of contact by observers with various afflicted persons. It is kept in mind that the Buddha is described as physically well endowed and healthy, while the occurrence of the physical attributes themselves are sought in disorders. The concept of the physical marks of a great man, having been formulated in an earlier period, is applied to the image of the Buddha himself.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.003 |
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".