MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2000022210 · doi:10.5539/ass.v4n1p103

On Differences between Eastern and Western Plastic Arts

2007· article· en· W2000022210 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lu Xue

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCrafts, Textile, and Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPlastic artsWestern cultureHarmony (color)CalligraphyGeneralityThe artsChinese cultureAestheticsChinaSociologyKinshipArchitectureOpposition (politics)SculpturePaintingAnthropologyVisual artsArtPsychologyPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plastic arts refer to the creation of visual static images with some substantial materials as well as methods, including architecture, sculpture, painting, industrial arts, design, calligraphy and seal cutting and so on. Due to the differences between the eastern and western cultures, plastic arts also display different characteristics. To be more specific, different geographical environments and social and historical environments have led to different cultural foundations of the two. The Chinese culture emphasizes the kinship while the western culture puts more importance to individual equality; the Chinese culture emphasizes ethical rules while the western culture the exploration into objective rules; the Chinese culture emphasizes harmony while the western culture opposition, hence resulting in the differences in Chinese and western value orientations. In addition, in the comparison between Chinese and western philosophy, the former seems to be macroscopic and comprehensive with its emphasis on the harmony between opposite sides and the inner experiences while the latter tends to be more scientific due to its division between sensibility and reason, individuality and generality.

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)0.001
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0020.005
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.277
Teacher spread0.219 · 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
Published2007
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Social ScienceSame topicCrafts, Textile, and DesignFrench-language works237,207