MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4367060287 · doi:10.5539/ach.v15n1p76

Zeya Paper Reborn: Designing Modern Chinese Lamps Using Traditional Bamboo Paper in Wenzhou, China

2023· article· en· W4367060287 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Maurizio Vrenna, Mengxi Cui

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Culture and History · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicArchitecture and Computational Design
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersYuhan
KeywordsChinaPapermakingExhibitionConnotationModernityAppealIndustrialisationPillarCultural heritageEconomyEngineeringPolitical scienceHistoryEconomicsLawArchaeologyPulp and paper industryMechanical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Papermaking is one of the four great inventions of ancient China and embodies centuries of wisdom. In the Zeya highlands, northwest of Wenzhou, handmade paper production became the pillar of the local economy during the last century. However, due to industrialization, the demand for traditional handmade paper has significantly decreased, and many papermaking workshops have had to shut down. Today, villagers mainly use Zeya bamboo paper for less noble purposes, such as draft paper. New applications for such culturally-rich material have to be envisioned. This manuscript discusses the Zeya Paper Reborn project, which is committed to showing the appeal of Zeya traditional paper through the design of modern Chinese lamps. The bamboo paper is combined with various materials, taking advantage of past and present aesthetics in an attempt to revitalize the local industry. A series of five lamps and an exhibition resulted from one year of study and practice. These design products are meaningful because they respect the regional tradition while adding a touch of modernity. The authors also discuss the project’s meaning, results, challenges, and limits. This essay will be of interest to design researchers and practitioners looking for novel approaches to preserve and promulgate Chinese intangible cultural heritage.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.566
Threshold uncertainty score0.684

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.199
Teacher spread0.182 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsian Culture and HistorySame topicArchitecture and Computational DesignFrench-language works237,207