MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2993486925 · doi:10.23977/aetp.2019.31009

Study on the Cultural Item Arrangement of Textbook Learn Chinese with Me

2019· article· en· W2993486925 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Hui Liu, Ye Ying, Kuang Yanhua, Lingling Li, Yao Meng

Bibliographic record

VenueAdvances in Educational Technology and Psychology · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinese as a foreign languageChinese cultureChinese languageFocus (optics)LinguisticsMathematics educationComputer scienceForeign languageCultural diversityContent analysisPsychologyNatural language processingChinaSociologySocial scienceHistoryAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the heat of learning Chinese and the development of teaching Chinese as foreign language, textbooks for Chinese as a foreign language have been published in large numbers, which contain the contents of Chinese cultural knowledge. At present, most of the studies on the cultural content of these textbooks focus on the theoretical level. Based on the combination of quantitative statistics and qualitative analysis, this paper uses cross-cultural communication and cultural linguistics as the theoretical basis, It uses the classification statistics method and comparative analysis method to investigate the culture items of Learning Chinese with Me. This paper points out the layout characteristics of the cultural items in the primary and intermediate textbooks of Learning Chinese with Me, summarizes the principles for the compilation of the cultural content of the textbooks, and provides suggestions for designing cultural content of present-day Chinese language teaching materials.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.206
Threshold uncertainty score0.329

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
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 head0.021
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.360 · 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

Citations1
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAdvances in Educational Technology and PsychologySame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207