MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409061999 · doi:10.5539/ass.v21n2p37

Research on the Design of Tang Dynasty Hunting Pattern Cultural and Creative Products Based on Narrative Design

2025· article· en· W4409061999 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueAsian Social Science · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCultural and Communication Design Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeAestheticsArchitectural engineeringBusinessSociologyHistoryLiteratureArtEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The hunting pattern is a popular style of Tang Dynasty textiles, which reflects the social culture and aesthetic interest of the time and is a witness to the fusion of Chinese and foreign cultural exchanges. From the perspective of narrative design, this paper takes the Chinese traditional hunting spirit as the core and cultural and creative products as the final expression, to realize the innovative design application of Tang Dynasty textile patterns. From the analysis of the three narrative elements of the Tang Dynasty hunting pattern, namely, narrative theme, plot, and expression level, the narrative design is developed by combining the product shape, material, and color. The design emphasizes the fun of the product and the interaction with the users to promote the users' in-depth experience and cognition of traditional Chinese culture, which provides a methodological guide for the practice of narrative design in cultural and creative products.

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.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.973
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.003
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.279
GPT teacher head0.403
Teacher spread0.124 · 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