Erlitou and Its Neighbors: Contextualizing Interregional Interaction in the Central Yellow River Region in Ancient China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The primary goal of this dissertation is to explore various possible interaction patterns between Erlitou and its neighboring regions through the approach of contextualization. Under the presupposition that Erlitou was the political center of ancient China, the interregional interaction between Erlitou and its neighboring regions were always interpreted as a “center-periphery” relationship. Instead of Erlitou-centered perspective, this dissertation attempts to adopt the approach of contextualization, investigating how the three main core areas in ancient China, namely the Henan Region in which Erlitou was located, as well as the Hedong Region and the Henei Region which were two major neighboring regions of Erlitou, interacted with each other during the second quarter of the second millennium BC. In the past, scholars put more emphasis on how the center influenced its peripheries. However, this dissertation will also investigate how the peripheries influenced the center and how peripheries interacted with each other. The approach of contextualizing exotic artifacts within local settings provides crucial insights, helping us to reexamine the interaction patterns between the Henan, Hedong, and Henei Regions. The research results reveal a highly complicated interaction network between these three regions during the Erlitou Period. First of all, the relationship between the Henan Region and the Henei Region was getting tense over time due to military conflicts. Besides, the Henei Region revealed a greater influence on the Henan Region. Second, the relationship between the Henan Region and the Hedong Region may have been marked by competition over the metal resources for casting bronze objects. However, the Henan Region seems to have displayed a greater influence on the Hedong Region. Finally, the relationship between the Hedong Region and the Henei Region seems to have been steady. Probably these two regions maintained a situation of peaceful coexistence for a long time in the Erlitou Period.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 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".