MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2112279799 · doi:10.1521/siso.65.4.428.17806

Between Sinocentrism and Eurocentrism: Debating Andre Gunder Frank's <i>Re-Orient: Global Economy in the Asian Age</i>

2001· article· en· W2112279799 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

VenueScience & Society · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicHistorical Economic and Social Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEurocentrismCapitalismFeudalismChinaEconomyEconomic historyPolitical sciencePeriod (music)SociologyPolitical economySocial scienceHistoryEconomicsLawPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Numerous theories have been advanced explaining the transition from feudalism to capitalism in western Europe, frequently by Marxists in the pages of Science & Society. Recently, however, a new group of world historians have mounted a concerted empirical attack on this “Eurocentric” perspective. They argue that as late as 1750–1800 China was the dominant player in the world market, and that its agriculture was more efficient and productive than Europe's. This essay attempts to refute empirically a recent key text in this anti-Eurocentric effort: Andre Gunder Frank's Re-Orient (1998). It also evaluates Bin Wong's China Transformed: Historical Change and the Limits of European Experience (2000), and its claim that both Europe and China in the 18th century “had not escaped the limits of the economically possible scenarios envisioned by classical economists of the period.”

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.487
Threshold uncertainty score0.740

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.240
Teacher spread0.207 · 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