Practice of Running Dyeing & Weaving Weekly in the Republic of China and Dissemination of Science and Technology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Dyeing & Weaving Weekly (1935-1941) is a scientific and technological periodical which has been published for a long time and has never been interrupted in the field of textile in modern China. The journal publishes a large number of the latest achievements in textile science and technology, and is an important historical material and typical case for the study of modern science and technology dissemination. Rich in content, Dyeing & Weaving Weekly focuses on solving practical problems in the textile industry and guiding the direction of scientific research, which not only promotes the dissemination of textile science and technology but also contributes to the development of the textile industry. Therefore, from the perspective of science and technology communication and the history of newspapers and periodicals, this paper examines the practice and communication strategies of Dyeing & Textile Weekly, in order to prove that Dyeing & Textile Weekly has a positive impact on science and technology communication in modern China, and also provides experience reference for the development of contemporary science and technology periodicals in China, which has certain reference significance.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".