MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2765247080

Global to Village| A Dreamland or the Land of Broken Dreams: Juxtaposed Conceptions of the Good Life in Heyang

2017· article· en· W2765247080 on OpenAlexaff
Xiaoxing Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaPower (physics)SociologyCommodificationRural areaFrontierScholarshipMythologyIdeal (ethics)Gender studiesInequalitySocial sciencePolitical scienceHistoryLawEconomyEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China’s rural villages, many of which are undergoing a great transformation from their communitarian past toward their fractured present, are significant sites of heightened inequalities unleashed during the reform era. Under the predominance of reproduced mythologies of rustic ideal, alternative conceptions of the good life derived from rural China remain largely disguised, marginalized and under studied. Following the ritual view of communication, this article examines the emergence, coexistence, and interplays of four distinctive conceptions of the good life in Heyang Village, a rural frontier that epitomizes the intensifying commodification of the countryside. By situating these juxtaposed conceptions within the transforming social relations of rural China, it is trying to unveil the hidden power struggles in the past and present countryside and to manifest the complexities of contemporary Chinese rural issues. In the end, this article concludes with a reflection on the conceptual significance of “the good life” for critical communication scholarship.

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)0.002
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 score0.007
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.034
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.179
GPT teacher head0.522
Teacher spread0.343 · 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

Citations1
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals)Same topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207