King Sejong's role in the repair of the Kyeongbok Palace in the early period of the Joseon Dynasty
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Kyeongbok Palace was completely renewed during the reign of King Sejong, the fourth King of the Joseon Dynasty(1392-1910). The repair was done for the two main purpose; one was to obtain the dignity of the main palace of the dynasty, the other was to make the palace suitable for the performing of the various ritual ceremonies. It was under the reign of King Sejong that every detail of the procedure of the royal ritual ceremony. The procedure of ritual ceremony changed the buildings of the palace. The quarter of Sajeong-jeon, King's office, was changed remarkably from the original form as the building became the beginning and ending point of King's moving during the ritual ceremonies. The site of the palace had ill reputation from the point of geomancy since its establishment. King Sejong ignored the rumor and kept the palace as usual. In his later year's, Sejong had tried to build a detached quarter and a Buddhist shrine in the palace. But he had to give up his plan because of the retainer's strong opposition. The original layout of the Kyeongbok Palace could be remained as the King renounced his controversial personal wish. King Sejong deserves a full credit for the establishment of the Kyeongbok Palace as the main palace of the Joseon Dynasty.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".