MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2803508603 · doi:10.24294/adr.v1i1.211

Cultural Symbols in Chinese Architecture

2018· article· en· W2803508603 on OpenAlexaff
Donia Zhang

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicColor perception and design
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSymbol (formal)HeavenArchitectureYin and yangChinese cultureBeijingReinterpretationIslamic architectureAestheticsSociologyHistoryLiteratureVisual artsChinaLinguisticsArtPhilosophyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Culture has been recognized as the fourth pillar of sustainable development, and culture is often viewed as a system of symbols that arises from human interpretations of the world. The cultural codes of symbols and symbolism are imperative to be reexamined for any reinterpretation of a traditional culture. This article explores the origin and meaning of the Yin Yang symbol in Chinese culture, and its subsequent numerological and color applications in classical Chinese architecture, such as Sanqing (Three Pure Ones), Wuxing (Five Natural Elements), Bagua (Eight Trigrams) in courtyard house design, and Jiugongtu (Nine Constellations Magic Square Matrix) and Jingtianzhi (Nine Squares land ownership system) in imperial Chinese city planning. The examples cited are Beijing siheyuan (courtyard houses), the Forbidden City, the Temple of Heaven, and Ningbo’s Tianyi Ge library. The paper aims to inspire younger generations to continue Chinese architectural heritage, and respect traditional principles when planning and designing architectural projects. It finally proposes the Yin Yang Yuan symbol to expand traditional Yin Yang symbol, to solve the dilemma of binary thinking and to avoid extremities.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.047
Threshold uncertainty score0.093

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.014
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.382
Teacher spread0.354 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations15
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicColor perception and designFrench-language works237,207