MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7029323455

To Kill or not to Kill? Helambu valley as a no kill zone: the issue of blood sacrifice and the transformation of ritual patterns in Hyolmo shamanism

2016· article· en· W7029323455 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueIRIS Research product catalog (Sapienza University of Rome) · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTechnology, Environment, Urban Planning
Canadian institutionsInnovation Cluster (Canada)
Fundersnot available
KeywordsShamanismBuddhismOpposition (politics)SacrificeNarrativeEthnic groupIdentity (music)Spirituality
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Narratives related to a rivality between lamas and shamans are very common throughout the Himalayas and the Hyolmo are no exception to this. The rule seems, generally, the establishment of a unified spiritual field originating from a division of religious labour characterized by hierarchization, opposition and complementarity at the same time. The resulting (asymmetric) religious field is not fixed once and for all: its boundaries are constantly shifting due to practical needs of the people and, to a larger extent, they are also tied to discourses about ethnic identity and "traditional" heritage. With this paper I want to highlight patterns of change affecting hyolmo shamanic rituals, and especially the ongoing debate surrounding the practice of ritual sacrifice. The blood offering, in fact, is seen more and more as a despicable action and many shamans, influenced by Buddhist ideas and/or due to a certain degree of social pressure, are transforming and adapting their rituals in order to cope with this very relevant change at the very core of every transaction with the spirit world.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.742
Threshold uncertainty score0.974

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.235 · 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