MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409798815 · doi:10.61091/jcmcc127b-359

Research on Comprehensive Evaluation Model of Cultural Value of Tang Dynasty Literary Works Based on Convolutional Neural Network and Text Feature Extraction

2025· article· en· W4409798815 on OpenAlexvenueno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial Computing · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicEducational Reforms and Innovations
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConvolutional neural networkValue (mathematics)Feature (linguistics)Artificial intelligenceComputer scienceArtificial neural networkNatural language processingLinguisticsPhilosophyMachine learning

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the process of social development of Tang Dynasty, literary works behind the depth of interpretation and expression, systematized spiritual concepts.In this paper, the text data of Tang Dynasty literary works are processed by word division and de-discontinued words, and it is intended to use Transformer model to realize the word vector transformation of text data, and put the word vector into Text-CNN network for iterative training to realize the text feature extraction.By means of text feature screening, the cultural value assessment system of Tang Dynasty literary works is formed, and a comprehensive evaluation model of cultural value is designed under the role of convolutional neural network and text features, and using the model of this paper, the cultural value of Tang Dynasty literary works is assessed.The accuracy rate of cultural value classes "", "" and "" is 1, while the accuracy rate of cultural value classes "I" and "" have accuracy rates of 0.98 and 0.96, indicating that the model in this paper can accurately assess the cultural value in Tang Dynasty literary works.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.422
Threshold uncertainty score0.512

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.345
Teacher spread0.308 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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 venueJournal of Combinatorial Mathematics and Combinatorial ComputingSame topicEducational Reforms and InnovationsFrench-language works237,207