MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2060496476 · doi:10.1142/s0192415x12500188

Comprehension of the Unique Characteristics of Traditional Chinese Medicine

2012· review· en· W2060496476 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Journal of Chinese Medicine · 2012
Typereview
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicTraditional Chinese Medicine Studies
Canadian institutionsAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTraditional Chinese medicineComprehensionChinaTraditional medicineWestern medicineTibetan medicineAlternative medicineEpistemologyMedicinePsychologyEngineering ethicsHistoryPhilosophyLinguisticsEngineeringPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) has made great contributions to human history, especially in China, as has been recorded for thousands of years. The characteristics of TCM in both theory and practice make it different from Conventional Western Medicine (CWM). The characteristics of TCM include phenomenological, philosophical, and methodological aspects. This paper briefly discusses some historical turning points and innovations in TCM development in China, explores human body enigmas such as the heart, compares different aspects of TCM and CWM, and identifies the unique characteristics of TCM treatment, as compared to other medical systems.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.894
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0090.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0000.007
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.002
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 head0.076
GPT teacher head0.356
Teacher spread0.281 · 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