MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1983231299 · doi:10.5539/ass.v8n3p63

Chinese People’s Understanding of the Korean Unification Issue

2012· article· en· W1983231299 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Debin Zhan, Hun Kyung Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKorean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersDong-A University
KeywordsChinaUnificationPeninsulaStatus quoGeopoliticsPolitical scienceEast AsiaPoliticsDiplomacyChinese peoplePolitical economyDevelopment economicsEconomyGeographySociologyEconomicsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A divided Korean peninsula has troubled Chinese diplomacy and has negative effects on Chinese national interest. The main factors such as the well-established historical relations between China and the Korean peninsula, the close geopolitics relations, and the Korean peninsula with the Sino-U.S. interaction influences the Chinese people’s view of the Korean unification issue.From national interest perspective, China hopes to see Korean unification that would be in favor of China, at least it will not bring negative influence. China also desires for a unified Korea that is neutral or friendly towards China, and for the withdrawal of the U.S. armed forces from the Korean peninsula. Otherwise, China wants to maintain the status quo and present situation. Although this is not supported by the Koreans, China will fully support reconciliation and cooperation, political dialogue, economic and cultural exchanges between North and South Korea. It is believed to contribute to keeping good relations between them, leading to a peaceful process of unification in the end.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.028
Threshold uncertainty score0.056

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.006
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.291 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations3
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicKorean Peninsula Historical and Political StudiesFrench-language works237,207