MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2923347259 · doi:10.3390/su11061820

The Sustainability of Ohanami Cherry Blossom Festivals as a Cultural Icon

2019· article· en· W2923347259 on OpenAlexaff
Emi Moriuchi, Michael D. Basil

Bibliographic record

VenueSustainability · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicCulinary Culture and Tourism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Lethbridge
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIconSymbol (formal)SustainabilityConsumption (sociology)Ephemeral keyCultural practiceSpring (device)Cultural sustainabilityVisual artsArtGeographySociologyAestheticsEngineeringBotanyEcologyPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background: One important form of sustainability is the continuation of culture and cultural practices. This study examined the case of Japanese Ohanami or cherry blossom festivals. Historically, Ohanami focused on the cherry blossom as a symbol of spring’s arrival, where communal aspects, consumption of sake and seasonal foods, painting or photography, and pilgrimages to sacred sites were used to celebrate the ephemeral aspects of blossoms, spring, and life. Methods: This study examines how cherry blossom festivals are celebrated and understood and how these celebrations are changing. Results: Current celebrations demonstrate several forces are changing this celebration. The changes in cherry blossom festivals are seen in four areas (bonding, cultural continuity, marketing exploitation, and cultural symbolism). Cherry blossom festivals are also observed overseas—at first glance this suggests its continuity, however, the ways in which Ohanami is observed raise concerns about the accuracy of this cultural practice. Conclusion: Ohanami celebrations are celebrated both in Japan and overseas, and although their practice continues, the nature of the cultural celebrations are changing.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.221
Threshold uncertainty score0.432

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
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

Citations26
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSustainabilitySame topicCulinary Culture and TourismFrench-language works237,207