MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2314932024 · doi:10.2307/2672079

Japanese Policy Towards China: Politics of the Imperial Visit to China In 1992

2001· article· en· W2314932024 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Young C. Kim

Bibliographic record

VenuePacific Affairs · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaPoliticsPolitical scienceHistory of ChinaHistoryAncient historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Japanese-Chinese relations reached a new watershed when Emperor Akihito paid an official visit to China in October 1992. It was in response to persistent and intense efforts made by the Chinese political and government leaders that the Japanese government at long last made the decision to accept the Chinese invitation and to proceed with an imperial visit. The formal public announcement of the Japanese government came on August 25, 1992. In actuality, however, with the concurrence of Prime Minister Miyazawa Kiichi, Foreign Minister Watanabe Michio had already decided affirmatively on the issue by the time he flew to Beijing in early January of that year. According to the official government version of what transpired in Beijing, the Chinese leaders brought up the matter of the imperial visit and Watanabe responded by saying that the Japanese government would give this matter serious consideration. What the official account omitted was that in his encounter with Foreign Minister Qian Qichen, Watanabe went so far as to ask whether the specific October dates of 22-27 would be acceptable to China and that Qian responded that they would be.' In essence, then, there was virtually a de facto understanding between the two sides that the imperial visit would occur in late October. The Japanese government evidently had intended to make a public announcement in April when Jiang Zemin was scheduled to visitJapan. The opposition to the imperial visitwithin the ruling party derailed that plan. Consequently, Prime Minister Miyazawa was unable to provide Jiang with a formal definitive commitment. In a meeting on March 18, Miyazawa had failed to secure support from the group called the supreme advisors of the LDP, most of whom served as prime ministers.2 The initialJapanese plans notwithstanding, it took about seven months for the Miyazawa cabinet to build a domestic political consensus and feel it politically opportune to make the August 25 announcement that the emperor would visit China for the period of October 23-28. On August

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 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)0.000
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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.588
Threshold uncertainty score0.988

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations7
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePacific AffairsSame topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207