Prosperity Highlights the Two Dimensions of the Essence of the Chinese Dream: Based on the Domestic and International Overall Situation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Chinese Dream is consistent with the dreams of economic and social development in the other countries of the world. However, the Chinese Dream’ going out of China and stepping towards the world is not as easy as we imagined. There is not only understanding, approving and supporting, but also excluding, suppressing and repelling. The international society sees the Chinese Dream based on the fragmentation view. In a word, today, it is very necessary to show the essence of the Chinese Dream: peaceful development, to the world. “Let the world see the true, open and confident China”. It is high time that we let the world to scan and examine the Chinese Dream from a realistically brand-new perspective of overall situation. Then, this paper intends to analyse, by the main methods of logical thought (including analysis, synthesis and interrelation and so on), historical review (including the big events of the world and the promises of the successive Chinese leaders) and data examples (including GDP and per capital GDP, GDP contribution rate, the foreign direct investment amount, and the foreign aid amount) and so on, how Prosperity, the primary value and core goal of the Socialist Core Values, highlights the two dimensions of the essence the Chinese Dream: first rejuvenation and second cosmopolitanism, which are integrated organically in her general essence: peaceful development, based on the international and domestic overall situation. The ultimate goal or the significance of the paper is to show that the realization of the Chinese Dream is not only good for the Chinese people, but also benefiting the world, hoping that those who are for the Chinese Dream could as always understand, support her and realize their own dreams with her, and who are against the Chinese Dream could at least understand her.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".