MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1894244880

신라의 王京과 小京

2011· article· ko· W1894244880 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venue역사학보 · 2011
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural and Historical Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCapital (architecture)NinthKingdomPoliticsQuarter (Canadian coin)Political sciencePopulationGeographyEconomic historyAncient historyEconomyHistoryDemographyLawSociologyArchaeologyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Since its establishment in the second quarter of the sixth century CE until the Middle Ancient Period, access to the royal capital of Silla remained largely restricted to members of the six-pu’s ruling class ; even chiefs of local communities were prohibited from entry. In time Silla expanded both to the northwest and along the east coast, establishing auxiliary capitals at the strategic points such as Asichon, Gukwon and Haseulla to ensure effective rule over the provinces. The unification of the Three Kingdoms by Silla resulted in the development of commerce and industry in the royal capital, which led to increasing population density. It also led to the establishment of additional minor capitals at strategic points which helped link the royal capital with provinces as well as strengthen royal control throughout more recently conquered territories. As time passed, the political influence of these auxiliary capitals weakened as the provincial centers became more important, but due to social and political disturbances that arose across the Silla Kingdom in the middle and late ninth century CE, these auxiliary capitals recovered much of their original importance.

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)0.000
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 score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.000

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.161
GPT teacher head0.203
Teacher spread0.042 · 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
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue역사학보Same topicCultural and Historical StudiesFrench-language works237,207