The Latin American History Exposition in the Higher Education Press Version World History (Modern History Volume)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article analyzed the Asian History exposition in the “World History (Modern History Volume)”, which was the new textbook in modern history of the world pressed by the Higher Education Press in 2007 December for the history major undergraduate in Chinese university. This article had full recognition on this college textbook for an undergraduate to study modern history of the world compared to the previous college textbook for an undergraduate to study modern history of the world has great progress, and also pointed out that it had some problems. This article would list some problems associated with the Asian history in this new textbook. These problems mainly include the following aspects: historical distortion, biased discusses, contradictory formulation, different translation, and inaccurate translation, elaborated indistinct and word error etc.. This article would discuss these problems associated with the Asian history in accordance with the East Asia, West Asia, South Asia, North Asia and Southeast Asia and other regions, in order to help the mend of the “World History (Modern History Volume)”, and provide a more accurate and interesting college textbook on modern history of the world for the later undergraduate to learn and think.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.084 | 0.015 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".