MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944065078 · doi:10.25071/1913-9632.39376

Severing Grandma’s Phallus

2019· article· en· W2944065078 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
N. Harry Rothschild

Bibliographic record

VenueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and Debate · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhallic stageReactionaryPillarEmperorAncient historyBronzeIdeologyPhallus (fungus)BuddhismPoliticsChinaArtPhilosophyHistoryLawArchaeologyTheologyPolitical scienceEngineeringPsychoanalysisPsychologyMale genitalia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 695, at the peak of her Zhou 周 dynasty (690-705), Wu Zhao 武曌 (624-705), China’s first and only female emperor, erected the Axis of the Sky (Tianshu 天樞), a hundred-foot tall octagonal Buddhist pillar topped with a quartet of dragons holding aloft a scintillating fire pearl, a monument that, according to Song Confucians “exalted the Zhou and disparaged the Tang.” In 714, her grandson Li Longji 李隆基 (685-762), emperor Tang Xuanzong 唐玄宗 (r.712-56), ordered this phallic pillar razed, and smelted its bronze and iron into weapons. This reactionary public political act played an important symbolic role in a wider campaign to re-institute a Confucian moral order that placed Han Chinese above non-Han subjects in the restored Tang 唐 (618-90, 705-907) realm, re-installed a normative patriarchal order that placed men over women, and re-situated Confucianism over Buddhism. Building on the work of Antonino Forte and Zhang Naizhu, in a triptych portraying erection, ejaculation, and castration, respectively, this article examines the dynamic, fluid political and ideological contexts in which Wu Zhao erected her magnificent phallic pillar and Xuanzong destroyed it.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.876
Threshold uncertainty score0.913

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.278 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and DebateSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207