MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W34993257 · doi:10.36469/jheor.2021.29145

近代自然科学与传统学术的现代转型―以章太炎、康有为、梁启超为例

2009· article· en· W34993257 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
张秀丽

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of health economics and outcomes research · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

甲午以后,随着西学异质文化的大规模传入,崇尚西学、新学之风日盛,中国传统学术受到前所未有的冲击,文化秩序处于重建的大动荡中。近代中国知识分子在接受新知与保存、改造传统之间,面临着前所未有的挑战。在这种情况下,以刚接受的西方新知、新理、新法整理中国传统旧籍,发明中国旧学之新义,以适应近代学术演进之大势,成为晚清学术演进之必然趋势。西方近代的自然科学打开了中国近代思想家的视野,使近代学人得以从一个崭新的角度重新认识宇宙、认识自然,客观上促进了传统学术的现代转型,开辟了一条文化秩序重建的道路。章太炎、康有为及梁启超堪为其中之典范。

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.999
Threshold uncertainty score0.135

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.117
GPT teacher head0.480
Teacher spread0.363 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of health economics and outcomes researchSame topicOvarian cancer diagnosis and treatmentFrench-language works237,207