Bibliographic record
Abstract
Confucius Institutes have become important institutions and channels for promoting Chinese language and culture internationally. With the establishment of 500 Confucius Institutes around the world, however, many problems are emerging, which need to be considered. There are major defects in the management of Confucius Institutes, which are manifested as follows: a) The Confucius Institute Headquarters (Hanban) has granted too much authority to the Confucius Institute management offices of Chinese universities, while lacking supervision and punishment mechanisms; b) Hanban fails to give powerful support to Chinese and host-country directors in a weak position and the restraints on directors in a strong position are insufficient; c) Some heads of Confucius Institute offices conspire with Chinese directors in a strong position to use the resources of Confucius Institutes to pursue their personal gains; and d) Some heads of Confucius Institute offices conspire with host-country directors in a strong position to make Chinese directors mere figureheads. Based on case studies, the paper analyzes the above problems and proposes measures to improve the Confucius Institute management system.
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 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 | 0.002 | 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 | 0.007 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".