MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409776525 · doi:10.54254/2753-7064/2025.22402

The Analysis of the Liangzhu Culture Based on Jade Artifacts and Architecture

2025· article· en· W4409776525 on OpenAlexaff
Hongting Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunications in Humanities Research · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJADE (particle detector)ArchitectureArtComputer scienceVisual arts

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Liangzhu culture was mainly distributed in the Taihu Lake basin and was one of China's important civilizations of the Neolithic Age. Its core area is in the ancient city of Liangzhu in Pingyao Township, Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province. With the archaeological excavations of the Liangzhu culture, there have been many speculations about the social structure of the Liangzhu culture. Previous research generally believed that the Liangzhu culture was an alliance of villages within a particular area and that the ruling class in the political center did not have excessive control over other village owners. This article will further explore the possible social structure based on past research on the social structure of the Liangzhu culture. By studying the villages and water conservancy facilities within the Liangzhu culture, this article argues that a power core may have dominated the culture, and its ruling class had specific resource control and administrative rights over the villages within its jurisdiction.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.022
Threshold uncertainty score0.044

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.004
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.191
GPT teacher head0.454
Teacher spread0.263 · 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 designObservational
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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunications in Humanities ResearchSame topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207