Types of Organizations and Their Scope of Cooperation in Textile Research Awarded by the National Science and Technology Awards in the Past 40 Years
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The National Science and Technology Award is the highest award in the field of science and technology in the People's Republic of China, which was formally established in 1978 after China's reform and opening up, and it has been forty years since then. The textile award-winning research in the National Science and Technology Award is one of the important characterizations of the progress of textile science and technology and the development of the textile industry. Through the statistical analysis of the research organizations of the textile award-winning research of the National Science and Technology Award from 1979 to 2020, it is found that enterprises have been the most dominant type in the past forty years; research institutes were the important force of textile science and technology research before 2000, but their influence gradually declined after 2000; the scientific research strength of the universities has risen and the scientific research resources are concentrated in the main universities with textile specialties; different types of research organizations have their cooperation methods, and the forty years have experienced the transformation from the intra-city to the intra-country cooperation, among which, the enterprises have the highest degree of freedom on the space of cooperation.
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 | 0.009 | 0.025 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.008 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".