MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156511914 · doi:10.1177/097194581001400102

Ponds, Paddies and Frontier Defence

2011· article· en· W2156511914 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ling Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Medieval History Journal · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLivelihoodFrontierAgricultureGovernment (linguistics)ChinaQuarter (Canadian coin)GeographyPoliticsPeriod (music)EconomyAgricultural economicsPolitical scienceEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

At the end of the 10th century, the Northern Song government constructed a series of ponds in northern Hebei in order to thwart its nomadic rival, the Khitan Liao. Throughout the following one and a quarter centuries of the dynasty, this strategic set of water features was enlarged, despite the environmental and human costs. This article looks at the history of these ponds, and paddy rice planting in this area, and explores their interaction with Hebei’s economy and environment during the period. It argues that the presence of these ponds dramatically changed the ecology of northern Hebei and brought about a series of political and economic problems: not only were local residents driven to find alternative means of livelihood or to emigrate out, but the government also came under significant economic pressure and committed itself to an unsuccessful policy of paddy rice production. The problems caused by this strategic military scheme played a significant role in the economic decline, especially of agriculture, of northeast China during the middle period of Chinese history.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.020

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.015
Scholarly communication0.0020.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.077
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.179 · 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

Citations28
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Medieval History JournalSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207