Scientificity and Rationality of Chinese Traditional Classical Fengshui Theory
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
Chinese traditional Fengshui theory was the fundamental basis, norm, and guiding ideology for site selection, planning, design, and building of residences in the ancient times. Based on the main classical theories of Chinese ancient Fengshui theory and the classical Fengshui model which is suitable for the planning and design of space field, this paper discusses and analyzes the Chinese traditional Fengshui theory from the multidisciplinary perspectives of hydrology, climatology, geology, topography, landscape ecology, environmental psychology, with an aim to demonstrate its scientificity and rationality, thereby, promote correct understanding and reasonable application of it. The conclusion is that Fengshui is based on multi-disciplinary knowledge, especially contains a large number of geological geography knowledge, and reflects the distinct principles of environmental ecology and sustainability. It is a comprehensive and systemic theory of planning and designing environment and architecture from the perspective of the modern scientific theory. The paper also aims to corroborate that Chinese traditional classical Fengshui theory is not only a culture or latent science, but also a comprehensive and interdisciplinary geography and environmental science with rich humanistic connotation. Therefore, it can and should be used extensively in the land-use policy, urban planning, landscape restoration, environmental protection, etc, and should be spread from China to Asian countries with similar cultural heritage, and even to the rest of the world.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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