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
Abstract Making Saints in Modern China offers a new perspective on the history of religion in modern and contemporary China by focusing on the profiles of religious leaders from the early twentieth century through the early twenty-first century. The volume offers biographies of prominent Daoists and Buddhists, as well as of the charismatic leaders of redemptive societies and state managers of religious associations in the Republican period and in the People’s Republic. Chapter authors include scholars from the United States, Canada, France, Italy, and Taiwan, some of whose work is made available in English for the first time. The focus of the volume is largely China proper, although some attention is devoted to Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Chinese diaspora. Each chapter offers a biography of a religious leader and a detailed discussion of the way in which he or she became a “saint.” “Sainthood” has been (and remains) a contested category in China, given the commitment of China’s modern leadership to secularization, modernization, and revolution, and the discomfort of China’s elite with religious matters. Yet most of the saints depicted in this volume succeeded in rebuilding old institutions and creating new ones, despite the Chinese government’s disdain. Chapters illustrate how these leaders deployed, and sometimes retooled, traditional themes in hagiography and charismatic communication to attract followers and compete in the religious marketplace. Negotiation with often hostile authorities was also an important aspect of religious leadership, and many chapters reveal unexpected reserves of creativity and determination.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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