arXiv preprint ·
Quantifying the Occult: A Comparative Study of Hindu and Buddhist Deities Using Machine Learning Methods
- Published
- Source
- arXiv preprint, posted before peer review
- Published in
- arXiv
- DOI
- 10.48550/arxiv.2609.27074
- Original
- Read it at arXiv
- Cited by
- 0 works, as OpenAlex counts them
- Topics
Abstract
This study introduces a dual-matrix computational architecture to mathematically quantify the morphological and theological divergence of 196 Hindu and Vajrayana Buddhist esoteric deities. Physical morphology is evaluated via a discrete Gower distance matrix enhanced by a novel "Cardinality Weighting" algorithm, while theological function is mapped via dense vector embeddings generated from Large Language Model (LLM) semantic expansions, explicitly utilized as a synthetic proxy to mitigate circular reasoning. The multi-modal topological projections provide algorithmic validation of "iconographic camouflage", demonstrating how distinct visual forms structurally obscure shared cross-tradition functions. Furthermore, I computationally model the "Atin Effect" - serving simultaneously as a psychological observation of sequential cognitive bias and a machine learning benchmark - demonstrating how high-cardinality esoteric anchors (e.g., a veena or a severed head) override systemic theological disparities to mathematically cluster orthodox and Tantric entities. Cross-tradition spatial analysis establishes that the highest esoteric manifestations, such as the Hindu Chinnamasta and the Buddhist Chinnamunda, share a near-identical mathematical coordinate across both visual ($D_G = 0.288$) and semantic ($D_C = 0.068$) boundaries, indicating a 1:1 esoteric transfer. By open-sourcing this architecture, I provide a scalable, unsupervised machine learning tool for Digital Humanities scholars and comparative theologians to rigorously map latent structural continuities across qualitative cultural corpora.
The authors’ abstract, as arXiv lists it. arXiv’s listings, abstracts included, are free for anyone to reuse.
Read it on ReadSearch
Each opens after you create an account, and brings you back to this paper.
More in Computers & Society
Literary Axioms: A Conceptual Framework for Literary Creation, Interpretation, and Evaluation
Who Acts, Who Knows, Who Answers? A Corpus-Assisted Discourse Analysis of Agency, Epistemic Responsibility, and Accountability in Generative AI Higher Education Research
Beyond Provenance: The Economics and Governance of Personalized AI Memory
What fidelity metrics miss: a structural check on synthetic educational data
When the Strike Zone Becomes Algorithmic: Umpire Judgment and Player Challenge Decisions under AI Review
Get the few papers worth your time in Computers & Society every morning.
ReadSearch reads the new papers in your field each day and brings you the few worth reading, each with its key finding in a sentence.