Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract To understand Taiwan society, it is important to develop an appreciation for the competing forces in the identity question. This is often boiled down to Chinese vs Taiwanese, but it goes much deeper than that, with implications for political identification and aspirations for the future of the island nation. Most previous studies look at ethnicity and ethnic identification within the context of a multicultural, multiethnic society such as the United States or Canada. The dynamic is extremely different in a largely homogeneous society (despite self-identification as either Mainlander or Taiwanese, both are, in strict racial terms, considered Han Chinese) such as that in Taiwan, and indeed most East Asian countries. Perspective matters as well: While the Taiwanese identity is growing according to recent polling data, both the Chinese in China and those who identify as Chinese in Taiwan tend to view the Taiwanese (Hokkien speakers) themselves as just another group of Han Chinese people. The migration of Chinese people to Taiwan did not begin until the 17th century, when the Dutch colonialists attracted (and in some cases, kidnapped) Chinese farmers from Fujian and Guangzhou provinces to work the plantations they had established. Thus, the Taiwanese people today are the descendants of these and subsequent waves of immigration during the Qing dynasty, along with a high degree of intermarriage with the indigenous population. These differing paradigms of self-identification have a tremendous importance in perception of the ROC military, the threat it faces, and the role it ought to play in society.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".