Destabilising Empires from the Margin: Report of the 25th North American Taiwan Studies Association Annual Conference, Seattle, 16–18 May 2019
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The 25th natsa post-conference report documents the initiation, organisation, and proceedings of the event, followed by some general reflections on what we can further investigate in the future. This year, we invited scholars worldwide to come together and rethink and offer critiques on the possibilities and challenges facing Taiwan studies by unpacking the idea of ‘empire’ and ‘marginality’. Given that agenda, we opened up discussions on some key topics around researching Taiwan and East Asia, such as political economy, democratisation, transitional justice, reconciliation, lgbtq , and culture studies. Attempting to reposition Taiwan studies in the broader intellectual terrain, a series of insightful dialogues thus emerged, pointing out alternatives of Taiwan studies in the face of empire(s) and marginality. In all, the natsa has formed one of the most widely known and vivid platforms for intellectual exchanges on Taiwan studies and further conversation shall continue alongside the growth of the scholarly community.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".