The rise of Asian in global history and perspective : 65 years after Bandung, what rupture and what continuity in Global Order?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THE RISE OF ASIA CONFERENCE 2020 took place in Paris (Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne) on February 12, 2020, and in Le Havre (Université Le Havre Normandie) on February 13-14, 2020. The exact title of the conference was “THE RISE OF ASIA IN GLOBAL HISTORY AND PERSPECTIVE: 65 years after Bandung: What rupture and what continuity in Global Order?” The conference was initiated and coordinated by Darwis Khudori, and was co-hosted by CHAC (Centre d’Histoire de l’Asie Contemporaine), Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne and GRIC (Groupe de Recherches Identités et Cultures), Université Le Havre Normandie. Around 70 papers were presented and discussed in plenary and parallel sessions of the conference. The parallel sessions were organised in the following clusters: AFRICA (1 session); ART & LITERATURE (1 session); ASIA (5 sessions); BANDUNG-RELATED ISSUES (1 session); CENTRAL-EASTERN EUROPE AND RUSSIA (1 session); CHINA-RELATED ISSUES (1 session); DIGITAL DEVELOPMENT (2 sessions); ECOBRICK WORKSHOP (2 sessions); ECOLOGY & URBAN ISSUES (2 sessions); FRENCH SESSION (3 sessions); GENDER & WOMEN ISSUES (3 sessions); INTER-UNIVERSITY NETWORKING (1 session); RELIGIOUS ISSUES (2 sessions). The presenters came from 25 countries: Algeria (1), Bulgaria (1), Canada (2), Chile (1), China & Taiwan (2), Congo (Republic) (1), Ethiopia (1), France (9), Germany (1), Hungary (3), India 6), Indonesia (28), Italy (3), Ivory Coast (2), Japan (4), Nigeria (1), Poland (2), Romania (2), Russia (3), Slovakia (1), South Korea (1), Sweden (1), The Netherlands (2), United Kingdom (2), United States of America (1). This report contains the conference concept, programme, abstracts, speeches, hosting and co-organising institutions, Scientific Board composition, sponsors, photos. A4, 140 pages, text and photos.
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 | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.008 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".