MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1685339656

Comparative Study on Cultural DNA of Chinese and Western Sketch

2014· article· en· W1685339656 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Qiu Yue

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural and Communication Design Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSketchFeelingOrder (exchange)Field (mathematics)Computer scienceSociologyEpistemologyPhilosophyMathematicsAlgorithmPure mathematics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, according to the analects of “Lunyu”, we try to interpret in concept of sketch. Depending on the clue of the development process for sketch, we contrasted western sketch with Chinese in order to analyze completely different points in their cultural DNA. Based on the conclusion, we still reflect Chinese modern sketch and put forward the idea that we should observe, think and explore for innovation in the field of sketch based on our own cultural DNA, eliminating the distractions and impetuous feeling in study of culture.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.131
GPT teacher head0.409
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

Citations0
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicCultural and Communication Design ResearchFrench-language works237,207