MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1577281705

閤門을 통해 본 朝鮮時代 宮闕의 內外槪念

2009· article· ko· W1577281705 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
경세진, 조재모

Bibliographic record

Venue대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계 · 2009
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsQuarter (Canadian coin)PresumptionNotional amountInterpretation (philosophy)Boundary (topology)ConfusionCharacter (mathematics)LinguisticsHistoryLawEpistemologySociologyPolitical sciencePsychologyPhilosophyMathematicsBusiness
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this study is to survey the concept of internal and external quarter in the palace by paying attention to conceptual word that designated Hapmoon(閤門) as the notional boundary. The concept of internal and external quarter is in common use when it interprets a whole arrangement of Joseon palace, or explains the territory of its inside. This is a conventional vocabulary, but despite that, it seems there is some confusion as to the interpretation concerning its boundary. That's because it is influenced by PyeonJeon(便殿; royal council hall) with pragmatic character. That is to say, PyeonJeon has characters of both internal and external quarter at the same time, and as time goes on, its function changed. On the one hand, Hapmoon exists as a boundary on the movement of main characters who participated in Royal Ritual. Therefore, it plays an important role in presumption of the relationship between spaces.

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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.006
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

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 studies0.0030.015
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.001

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.219
Teacher spread0.169 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue대한건축학회 논문집 - 계획계Same topicCultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207