# r3-b1-33

**Claim (as registered):** The fraction of a state's holding-institution NAME labels written in non-Latin script is substantially and cleanly higher in Hindi/Devanagari-administrative-belt states than in non-Hindi-belt states -- and this does not simply track whether the state's own official language is itself written in Devanagari (one training state uses Devanagari for its own official language but shows a near-zero non-Latin institution-name share).

**Proposed mechanism:** Institution-NAME transliteration practice (an entirely different axis from the script of the cataloged manuscripts themselves) is proposed to track the administrative-language convention the cataloguing institution itself operates under, not the script of the material it holds.

**Scope:** Source: NAMAMI (India), a state-facetted manuscript-holdings portal (holdings, not origin -- every record is held-by, not produced-by, the state). Training: 11 states with a complete portal walk (~4.22M records: Bihar, Himachal Pradesh, Karnataka, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh, Maharashtra, Odisha, Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Uttar Pradesh, West Bengal). Holdout: 9 more states/union territories walked to completion after this claim was fixed (Jammu & Kashmir, Assam, Haryana, Delhi, Manipur, Puducherry, Punjab, Uttarakhand, Jharkhand), each landed as a complete, reconciled count before testing. All data comes from one portal, so survival across states shows stability within this portal's own cataloguing practice, not independently of it. Grain: holdings-weighted share of distinct institution-name strings containing any non-Latin Unicode character, per state.

**Training-side evidence:** Belt-state minimum 45.03%, cleanly separated (more than 3x) from the non-belt maximum of 14.10%; one belt state reaches 92.01%. A later, independent investigation traced part of one belt state's high figure to records entered by a single out-of-state cataloguing centre working in a different non-Latin script -- confirming the classifier genuinely measures non-Latin SCRIPT specifically (any non-Latin script, not only the belt's own), a real, disclosed, unexcluded rival reading of what drives part of the belt-state signal.

**Holdout test and outcome:** Tested across all nine India holdout states/UTs. One holdout state with substantial holdings in a non-Devanagari, non-Latin script nonetheless catalogued those holdings under Latin-script (romanized) institution names -- a neutral finding showing institution-name script and holdings content are independent axes, not counted against the belt/non-belt claim itself. Another holdout state (carved administratively out of a training-belt state) showed the strongest belt-pattern confirmation in the whole project: 86.17% non-Latin institution names. Remaining holdout states showed shares below the belt minimum, consistent with patterning non-belt.

**Status:** Survived every tested holdout state.
