MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409554171 · doi:10.1080/01426397.2025.2489975

Evolving ideologies and practices of parks in post-1949 China: a study on Tianjin Water Park

2025· article· en· W4409554171 on OpenAlexaff
Yiwei Pan, Chunyan Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueLandscape Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicJapanese History and Culture
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
FundersNational Natural Science Foundation of China
KeywordsChinaIdeologyGeographyEnvironmental planningEnvironmental protectionEnvironmental resource managementPolitical scienceArchaeologyEnvironmental sciencePoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Tianjin Water Park (Shuishang Gongyuan 水上公園), established in 1950 during the early years of the People’s Republic of China, reflects the interplay between spatial development, political discourse, and the evolving theories and practices of China’s landscape architecture. As a representative case, this paper examines the park’s transformations through historical documents and archives, revealing its shifting roles in the contemporary history: from addressing urban population growth and green space shortages to adopting Soviet-inspired planning models of ‘Park of Culture and Recreation’, and later becoming a stage for diplomacy and market-oriented developments. This paper positions the park as a complex field shaped by discourse, power, and knowledge, using this case to uncover the convoluted trajectory of large urban parks’ conceptual evolution in post-1949 China.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.090
Threshold uncertainty score0.179

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.008
Scholarly communication0.0030.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.060
GPT teacher head0.435
Teacher spread0.374 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLandscape ResearchSame topicJapanese History and CultureFrench-language works237,207