Bibliographic record
Abstract
Zen is the product of Buddhism and Chinese culture, as the part of which ,it has penetrated into our daily life, and surpassed itself. Zen gives traditional Chinese art design special color and influences people ‘s thought of design esthetics, style of design esthetics, all these become our traditional ways of expression. But the influence of Zen is seldom noticed. Now people come to know the importance of traditions. this article try to talk about Zen’s influence on Chinese art design and its significance by three points: the sense of “yijing”, space and natural consciousness. Key words: zen, Buddhist Culture, art design, traditional culture Resume: Le zen est le produit de la combinaison du bouddhisme et de la culture chinoise. En tant que partie de notre culture, il pepetre deja dans tous les domaines de notre vie quotidienne. La culture Zen permet au deisign artistique traditionnel de Chine de revetir des aspects originaux, influe dans une large mesure sur l’esthetique du design et devient ainsi un moyen special d’exprimer la sentiment et l’esthetique nationaux. Cependant, l’influence de l’ecole Zen sur l’art est rarement invoquee. Il est necessaire de reconsiderer son influence dans le contexte ou l’on insiste sur le retour a la tradition nationale du design. L’article present tente d’aborder comment l’ecole Zen influence la pensee artistique traditionnelle de Chine et sa conception du design sous les angles de la conception de l’etat d’âme, la conscience spatiale et la conscience naturelle dans le design artistique, et d’explorer la portee actuelle de cette influence. Mots-Cles: ecole Zen, culture bouddhique, design artistique, culture traditionnelle
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".