MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3016032941 · doi:10.3968/11549

Li Shanlan’s Achievements in Scientific Translation and His Contributions to the Modernization of Chinese Sciences

2020· article· en· W3016032941 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Jia Wang, Changbao Li

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Technology and Pedagogy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernization theoryChinaChinese academy of sciencesDisciplineSociology of scientific knowledgeFoundation (evidence)Chinese scienceSociologySocial scienceHistoryPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Li Shanlan is a well-known translator, scientist and educator in the late Qing Dynasty of China. He published 8 great translation works in his lifetime, totaling 104 volumes. Li’s translation works encompass many important fields of modern western sciences -- mathematics, astronomy, mechanics and botany. His erudite knowledge, profound research, and far-sighted vista mark the translator somebody in the Chinese history. This paper firstly discusses Li Shanlan’s specific scientific translations, and then analyzes and points out that his great contributions to the modernization of Chinese sciences. The pioneer Li has not only disseminated western scientific knowledge and laid the foundation for the disciplinary knowledge system in China, but has also cultivated a large number of talents to meet the development and construction in modern Chinese sciences. Moreover, many scientific terms he translated and created are still in use today, consistently yielding a positive effect on the contemporary Chinese sciences and education.

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)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.997
Threshold uncertainty score0.033

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0030.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.003

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 head0.069
GPT teacher head0.398
Teacher spread0.330 · 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.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicEducational Technology and PedagogyFrench-language works237,207