Race, Politics and History in a Survey of Contemporary Ethnographic Writing on Trinidad
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Contemporary anthropological work in Trinidad is largely focused on theorizing the racial antagonisms between Indo and Afro Trinidadians. Since the time of independence, political leaders have called for unity and harmony amongst . Trinidadians, but individuals of all racial groups who utilize primordial understandings of race in everyday discourse to negotiate tensions and define themselves contest the shape and content of what it means to be Trinidadian. While a study of Trinidadian history shows that many of the stereotypes which operate in contemporary Trinidad have their roots in colonial discourses surrounding Afro and Indo Trinidadians, ethnographic work shows that these stereotypes have changed in response to various political and economic pressures, and that individuals utilize or ignore these stereotypes depending on context and goals. Further, Indo-Trinidadians have historically been semantically excluded from the lexicon which describes what it means to be Trinidadian by their exclusion from the term 'Creole,' and as such have faced considerable difficulty accessing reins of political power due to their exclusion from a sense of Trinidadian identity.
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.013 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".