MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2075204628 · doi:10.1086/ahr.115.1.192-a

JESSIE GREGORY LUTZ. Opening China: Karl F. A. Gutz-laff and Sino-Western Relations, 1827-1852. (Studies in the History of Christian Missions.) Grand Rapids, Mich.: William B. Eerdmans. 2008. Pp. xix, 364. $45.00

2010· article· en· W2075204628 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Thomas Klein

Bibliographic record

VenueThe American Historical Review · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiographyScholarshipGermanChinaQuarter (Canadian coin)HistoryClassicsTheologyArt historyPhilosophyLiteratureArtLawPolitical scienceArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The German-born missionary Karl F. A. Gützlaff (1803–1851) was an important yet controversial figure in Sino-Western relations in the second quarter of the nineteenth century. Long dismissed as an impostor and an agent of imperialism by Chinese and Westerners alike, he has been given a more balanced treatment recently, with a number of scholars pointing out his role as a cultural mediator. Still lacking was a comprehensive biography that conformed to the standards of modern scholarship. Jessie Gregory Lutz has written that biography. It is based on a vast amount of source material, which she collected in the course of over two decades, partly together with her husband, the late Rolland Ray Lutz, whose role in transcribing the handwritten German documents is acknowledged in the preface. Lutz's biography advances the study of Gützlaff in a number of ways. First, she manages to maintain a balance between her protagonist and the...

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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.081
Threshold uncertainty score0.162

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.004

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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.328
Teacher spread0.278 · 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
GenreReview

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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe American Historical ReviewSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207