Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article aims to ascertain the date and significance of what appears to be a Sui Dynasty (581-618) Iron Buddha by closely examining the artifact and the inscription on it. After a preliminary attempt to determine the ‘style’ of the Iron Buddha, more in-depth comparative analyses of it are carried out that focus on reconstructed dynastic calendars and the sexagenary dates in them, Buddhist iconography from the same period and the formulaic narrative and prayer-like entreaty passages found on them, and a companion Stone Guanyin piece located in the Detroit Institute of Arts. Summing up the results, in addition to substantiating the inscribed date found on the Iron Buddha, these analyses demonstrate that the Iron Buddha and Stone Guanyin were part of a larger story, one that was being played out during the Northern & Southern Dynasties period, when Chinese social order and the Confucian ideology supporting it were declining, replaced in many areas by the growing influence of Daoism and Buddhism. This story centers on the tale of two filial sons who commissioned these pieces, hoping, in still following the centuries-long Confucian tradition, to honor their deceased Father, while doing so within the context of a rising Buddhist worldview, one in which they wished him freedom from pain and re-birth in a better place.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".