Bibliographic record
Abstract
Tea is becoming more and more popular in this modern time. It is said that people in more than 100 countries and regions all over the world drink tea. Howerer, in different countries, the customs of tea drinking is not the same. In some places, it is taken as an art; in some other places, it is viewed as a way of character cultivation, or a tool of etiquette education. And sometimes, it is just a natural part of daily life. The custom of tea drinking can symbolize culture from which different values and cultural orientations can be learned, which is meaningful to international cultural exchanges.This paper made a comparative study on tea customs in some countries that are typical to represent the main trends of tea drinking. Key words : Tea customs; Comparative study; Cultural exchanges Resume Le the est de plus en plus populaire dans cette epoque moderne. Il est dit que le the est bu dans plus de 100 pays et regions du monde boivent. Cependant, dans differents pays, les coutumes de boire du the n'est pas la meme. Dans certains endroits, il est considere comme un art; dans certains autres endroits, il est considere comme un moyen de la culture de caractere, ou un outil d'education etiquette. Et parfois, il est juste une partie normale de la vie quotidienne. La coutume de boire du the peut symboliser la culture a partir de laquelle differentes valeurs et des orientations culturelles peut etre appris, ce qui est significatif pour le papier exchanges. This culturelle internationale a fait une etude comparative sur les coutumes de the dans certains pays qui sont typiques pour representer les principales tendances de la consommation de the. Mots cles : les coutumes de the; Une etude comparative; Les echanges culturels
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".