MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2044980792 · doi:10.5539/jpl.v1n1p68

The Thinking Way of Confucianism and the Rule of Law

2008· article· en· W2044980792 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Politics and Law · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRule of lawIdeologyChinaValue (mathematics)LawChinese lawRelation (database)Core (optical fiber)Political scienceComparative lawMunicipal lawPoliticsMathematicsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Confucianism as the old ideology had been criticized for a long time from the official point of view in China; however, its core value is still influencing Chinese society. On the way towards road of the rule of law, Confucianism is considered playing the negative role. It is necessary to study the framework of Confucianism systematically so as to understand why the rule of law shows difference in between China and western world, and why Chinese would rather resolve disputes in Confucianism way than the rule of law. I will discuss the thinking way of Confucianism, analyze its core value and the relation between Confucianism and the rule of law, through which get to the conclusion that Confucianism value has the inclination to avoid the law.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.327
Threshold uncertainty score0.723

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.249 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
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

Citations11
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Politics and LawSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207