Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the advent of the global information age, Japanese youth today are required to have authentic abilities to communicate with different peoples from different countries in the English language, rather than simply a good knowledge of practical and functional American English. Affective learners of English are created through aesthetic reading, especially English poetry, when moved or inspired by the authenticity of the content implying the profound but subtle meaning of human emotion in life. In this sense, the way of affective and aesthetic English learning follows the traditional Japanese appreciation of ephemeral beauty. As an authentic incentive to intellectual activities, this sensitivity leads to a deep, accurate, and rapid understanding of different peoples in the global world. American English education in Japan therefore should be aimed at a broader goal of English as a shared language for Internet-based communication, fostering a greater sense of traditional Japanese beauty for a more affective English-learner in the global community. Avec l’avènement de l’ère de la mondialisation, la jeunesse japonaise d’aujourd’hui est tenue d’avoir des capacités authentiques afin de communiquer avec différents peuples de différents pays dans la langue anglaise, plutôt que de simplement avoir une bonne connaissance, pratique et fonctionnelle, de l’anglais américain. Des apprenants affectifs de l’anglais sont stimulés par la lecture esthétique, particulièrement la poésie anglaise, lorsqu’ils sont émus ou inspirés par l’authenticité du contexte impliquant la signification profonde mais subtile de l’émotion humaine dans la vie. Dans ce sens, la manière affective et esthétique de l’apprentissage anglaise suit l’appréciation japonaise traditionnelle de la beauté éphémère. Comme incitation authentique aux activités intellectuelles, cette sensibilité mène à une compréhension profonde, précise et rapide de différents peuples dans le monde globalisé. L’éducation de l’anglais américain devrait alors viser à un objectif plus général de l’anglais non seulement comme langue partagée pour la communication par Internet, mais aussi favorisant un plus grand sens de beauté traditionnelle japonaise afin de produire des apprenants affectifs dans la communauté globale.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".