Lusheng’s Preservation and Transmission of Knowledge in Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture, Guizhou Province, China
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The study on the preservation and transmission of Lusheng knowledge in Qiandongnan Miao and Dong Autonomous Prefecture, Guizhou Province, China, yields important findings. It begins by detailing the traditional 6-pipe Lusheng’s production process, stressing its employment on numerous cultural occasions but its limited applicability for solo performances owing to its narrow tonal range. Throughout, regional differences in Lusheng scale configurations contribute to a variety of musical styles. Mr. Dong Dan Gan is a key figure in the growth of Lusheng instruments. It starts with the 8-pipe Lusheng, then moves on to the 11-pipe version, which expands tonal potential. Subsequent variations, such as the 12-pipe, 13-pipe, 14-pipe, 16-pipe, 19-pipe, and ground-breaking 18-pipe, 21-tone Lusheng, increased adaptability and melodic possibilities even more. Moreover, Lusheng has a wider tone range. These advancements accommodate varied musical traditions and help to preserve and disseminate Lusheng knowledge, strengthening the cultural legacy. And efforts have enhanced Lusheng music greatly, aiding its transmission and cultural continuation.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".