Bibliographic record
Abstract
Based on Lin Shuwu′s studying on Metaphor, this paper is elaborating his main opinion and contribution. It is considered that Lin Shuwu′s Metaphor research characterizes synchronic and diachronic, macroscopic and microscopic, his result of studying has creative aspects, and makes great effort to the scientific development of linguistic science. Key words: Lin Shuwu, Metaphor studying, Critics Resume: Sur la base de l’etude metaphorique de longues annees de Lin Shuwu, le present article commente ses points de vue principaux et contributions. L’auteur pense que l’etude metaphorique de Lin est caracterisee par la combinaison synchronique-diachronique et la combinaison macro-micro. Ses resultats de recherches innovateurs apporte de la contribution au developpement de la science linguistique. Mots-cles: Lin Shuwu, etude metaphorique, traduction grammaticale 摘要：在林書武多年來隱喻研究的基礎上，評述其主要觀點及所作出的貢獻。認為林書武的隱喻研究體現了歷時與共時，宏觀與微觀相結合的特色，其研究成果在批判的基礎上有所創新，為語言學科的科學發展助了一臂之力。 關鍵詞：林書武；隱喻研究；述評
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
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.
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".