MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

“No place like home”: Aging in post-reform Beijing

2017· article· en· W2617750565 on OpenAlexaff
Jie Yu, Mark W. Rosenberg

Bibliographic record

VenueHealth & Place · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMigration, Aging, and Tourism Studies
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBeijingIdeologyCollectivismInterpretation (philosophy)InequalitySociologyIdentity (music)ConsciousnessGender studiesChinaPolitical sciencePolitical economyPsychologyPoliticsIndividualismAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study shows the Western theorization and interpretation of aging, place and health are not well suited to a non-western case. The current generation of older Chinese has experienced the transition from a planned economy to a socialist market economy. Urban changes have taken place in various ways. This study explains the spatio-temporal processes of older people with their changing places by conducting in-depth interviews with 47 older people living at home in Beijing. Their generational consciousness and old place identities are deeply rooted in pre-reform Collectivism and shaped by socialist ideologies of the past. The representation of the old identity among older people is circumscribed by their living situations and selectively manifested. In most cases, there are limited mechanisms formed to recreate positive place meanings and reintegrate older people and place. The processes reflect the growing social inequality and changing cultural values in a society in transition. Growing social inequality and changing cultural values have a great impact on older people's health and well-being.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.061
Threshold uncertainty score0.121

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.321 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations45
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHealth & PlaceSame topicMigration, Aging, and Tourism StudiesFrench-language works237,207