MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2974365524 · doi:10.1080/23729988.2019.1639454

Commoditization of the sacred: production and transaction of Buddhist statues in fifth- to tenth-century China

2019· article· en· W2974365524 on OpenAlexaff
Yongshan He

Bibliographic record

VenueStudies in Chinese Religions · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommoditizationBuddhismChinaCommodityObject (grammar)Database transactionAmbiguityProduction (economics)AestheticsSociologyHistoryAncient historyArtPhilosophyArchaeologyEconomicsLinguisticsMarket economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article investigates the relationship between two seemingly opposite aspects of Buddhist statues: being both a sacred object and a commodity. By looking at their production and transaction processes, it examines how these medieval Buddhist statues were ‘singularized’ and ‘commoditized,’ as well as the activities of different social groups in relation to them. This article intends to shed some new light on the roles played by ‘sacred objects’ in medieval Chinese society, through studying how people actually perceived and interacted with them in diverse ways. It is suggested that the ambiguity of the nature of these statues – being both singular and common, sacred and commercial – entailed a host of new religious and economic practices which contributed to the wide spread of the religion in medieval China.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.324
Teacher spread0.303 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueStudies in Chinese ReligionsSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207