Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract: Canada's 1885 Royal Commission on Chinese Immigration did not end well for the Chinese. It resulted in four Chinese Immigration Acts. The last one was the 1923 Chinese Exclusion Act. Before the CPR (1885) and before Confederation (1867), Western thought was shaped by the racist justification to plunder China through a colonial dominating psychology, known as the "Yellow Peril." Through Opium Wars, military occupations and unequal treaties, European supremacy over China felt complete. This White superiority grievously affected Chinese peasants who migrated to Canada to escape poverty. Today, China has risen from the "century of humiliation" to challenge the West for a place in the global economy and yet cannot escape Sinophobia. Anti-Asian/Chinese hate has provoked "Yellow Peril 2.0." In 2023, there are demands for a public inquiry on Chinese interference and influence, and a foreign agent registry. There is a direct connection between current events to those of a hundred years ago. Résumé: La commission royale canadienne de 1885 sur l'immigration chinoise ne s'est pas bien terminée pour les Chinois. Elle a abouti sur quatre lois sur l'immigration chinoise. La dernière en date est la loi d'exclusion des Chinois de 1923. Avant la création de la Commission royale (1885) et avant la Confédération (1867), la pensée occidentale était façonnée par la justification raciste du pillage de la Chine par une psychologie coloniale dominatrice, connue sous le nom de "péril jaune". Grâce aux guerres de l'opium, aux occupations militaires et aux traités inégaux, la suprématie européenne sur la Chine semblait accomplie. Cette supériorité blanche a eu de graves répercussions sur les paysans chinois qui ont émigré au Canada pour échapper à la pauvreté. Aujourd'hui, la Chine s'est relevée du "siècle de l'humiliation" et défie l'Occident pour se faire une place dans l'économie mondiale, mais elle n'échappe pas à la sinophobie. La haine anti-asiatique/chinoise a provoqué le "péril jaune 2.0". En 2023, on demande une enquête publique sur l'ingérence et l'influence de la Chine, ainsi qu'un registre des agents étrangers. Il existe un lien direct entre les événements actuels et ceux d'il y a cent ans.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 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".