MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2617817669

Korean Wave| The Korean Wave: Retrospect and Prospect ― Introduction

2017· article· en· W2617817669 on OpenAlexaff
Dal Yong Jin, Tae‐Jin Yoon

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsKorean WaveSection (typography)Popular cultureFrench New WaveAnimationDigital eraMedia studiesHistoryAdvertisingPolitical scienceSociologyMovie theaterVisual artsThe InternetComputer scienceBusinessArtWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Korean Wave (hallyu in Korean) marks a historical point and celebrates its 20th anniversary in 2017. The Korean Wave primarily started with a few well-made television dramas that were popular in East Asia, and the local cultural industries have advanced several cultural forms, including K-pop and digital games, which have gradually penetrated global markets. This Special Section focuses on the origin of the Korean Wave, and the articles emphasize either theoretical challenges in hallyu studies or empirical cases of hallyu in various areas of the world. The primary purpose of this Special Section is to explore the history of the Korean Wave as a catalyst of regional and global change by analyzing the evolution, structure, mechanisms, and strategies employed by the music, television, film, digital games, and animation industries in the global markets and their shifting relationships with the state. As the foundational basis for the articles in this Special Section, our goal in this introduction is to provide several key dimensions of the Korean Wave to help readers understand the nature of the emerging local popular culture and digital technologies as a new trend.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Scholarly communication, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.317
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.001
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.241
GPT teacher head0.542
Teacher spread0.300 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designObservational
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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207