MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1944555705 · doi:10.1017/s0026749x00003814

Chinese Politics at the Crossroads: Reflections on the Hundred Days Reform of 1898

2000· article· en· W1944555705 on OpenAlexaff
Luke S.K. Kwong

Bibliographic record

VenueModern Asian Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaExhibitionPoliticsInstitutionHistoryDramaEconomic historyPolitical scienceAncient historyArt historyClassicsLawArtVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Few students of modern China would dispute that the Hundred Days Reform of 1898 ushered in a major nation-building effort that, despite false starts and setbacks, has continued to this day. Thus, history and policy converged when its centenary in 1998 was widely commemorated—20 years after reform was again proclaimed China's national agenda (1978). Beida, or Peking University, which traces its founding to the establishment of the Imperial College (Jingshi daxuetang) in 1898, celebrated not only the historical event but also its own evolution over the past century to become China's leading institution of higher learning. The Palace Museum, which stands on the grounds of the former Forbidden City, where much of the 1898 drama unfolded, commemorated with an exhibition of archival materials and historical artifacts. It lasted from June 11 to September 21, the original dates of the Hundred Days. Historians did not lag behind. In an outpour of publications, they explored the multifarious facets of the famous episode. China scholars elsewhere also took note of the centenary. Two panels at the 1998 meetings of the Association for Asian Studies in Washington, D.C., for example, presented papers that dealt with, if not exactly what transpired a century ago, issues somehow related to it.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.626
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.079
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations15
Published2000
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueModern Asian StudiesSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207