MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1483360875 · doi:10.3968/5934

A Study on Forming a Construction Land Market That Unifies Urban and Rural Areas During the Process of the New-Type Urbanization in China

2014· article· en· W1483360875 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jingyi Wang, Heping Liao, Lin Zhu, Tao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in sociology of science · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRegional Development and Environment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUrbanizationStatus quoChinaBusinessCommunismMarket mechanismRural areaEconomic growthEnvironmental planningProcess (computing)Economic systemGeographyPolitical scienceMarket economyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Under the background of China’s new-type urbanization, the transformation of urbanization which is people-centered is quietly underway. The new-type urbanization not only puts people first, but also is firmly based on establishing a construction land market that unifies urban and rural areas. The Third Plenary Session of the 18th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party adopted the “Decision on Major Issues Concerning Comprehensively Deepening Reforms” (hereinafter referred to as the “Decision”), in which “forming a construction land market that unifies urban and rural areas” was proposed, and the Decision advocated that the rural collectively-owned construction land can “enter the market with the same rights and at the same prices as state-owned land”. This paper firstly reviewed the status quo of China’s construction land market in which there is segmentation between urban and rural areas. Then under the guidance of the specific reforming measures proposed by the Decision, the paper made a further attempt to discuss and explore the supporting measures of and safeguard mechanism for forming a construction land market that unifies urban and rural areas.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.065

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.278 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in sociology of scienceSame topicRegional Development and EnvironmentFrench-language works237,207