A Study on Japanese Healing Films from Visual, Sound, and Narrative Aspects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nowadays, people are increasingly dependent on the media to meet their needs. Healing movie is a kind of film which aims to make the audiences’ emotions be positively affected and to feel satisfied. Previous studies on the birthplace of healing culture, Japan and Japanese healing films have found some formal and thematic characteristics of Japanese healing films. Based on the previous studies, this paper, after an observation and analysis of 50 Japanese healing films, looks at three aspects of filmmaking: visual design, sound design, and plot narrative, summarized the features of Japanese healing films in the production technology that serve to achieve the purpose of healing people’s mood. The results also found recurring thematic elements that have been discussed in previous studies, such as nature worship, simplicity, and innocence. Importantly, this research analyzed through the focus on visual, sound, and narrative aspects that the Japanese healing filmmakers prioritize the preservation of the portrayal of life's simplicity and beauty. They consciously steer away from depicting tragedy, turmoil, and complex societal issues in their films. That is, they are on the one hand trying to restore reality, showing that almost unadorned beauty, while avoiding realistic cruelty.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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.
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".