Ancient Local Chronicles and Its Association with Modern Social Survey
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Some famous scholars during the Republic of China (1912-1949) would mention ancient local chronicles when they were talking about social survey, and would even make comments on their differences and advantages or disadvantages. Such a phenomenon is not something accidental; in fact, there are important historical reasons. Returned students from overseas at the end of Qing Dynasty created a journal called Zhejiang Tide, which had a special column named Social Survey. A comparison of the article Survey on Qingtian County in Chu Zhou there with the relevant local chronicle Chronicles of Qingtian County made in Guangxu Years would reveal a high similarity and hence indicates that the two have essential relationship. The reason lies in that ancient Chinese local chronicles had already had some characteristics of social survey. Some factors, such as the means, approach, and organization of survey, were much close to those of modern social investigation. It therefore suggests that, in the early period when social investigation was just introduced into China, the Chinese people were not clear about what it was and hence referred to ancient local chronicles.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it