Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article, it was my intention to extend the understanding the meaning of the rapid expansion of the Confucius Institution from not just remaining the realm of divergent political perspective interpreting chinese rise as a threat to the dominating western civilization to the cultural network of global recourses in accordance with Manuel Castells’s theory, The establishment of overseas Confucian Institute in fact emulated the cultural institutions of the world, it should be viewed to provide more access to build cultural network under the situation of a certain degree of cultural consumption was available. In order to evaluate how much scale the Confucian Institute succeed to enlarge Chinese soft power in accordance with its purpose of establishment, I took the New York Times and analysed the news articles about Confucian Institute in U,S and Canada which confirmed that the U,S media indeed operated to be perceived as an aide to Chinese political and economical goals. In case of Chinese Media, the reporting attitude of The People’s Daily was not significantly different from that of U,S, Media. Though Confucian Institute was indeed to expand soft power, its image seemed to remain in political side. Therefore in order to achieve the goals of spreading the soft images as well as numerical increment, it is needed to localize the activities of Confucian Institute and got local media attention to them in north-american region along with developing various access to motivate voluntary involvement of private sector in China.
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 | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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".