Research on the Artistic Characteristics of Hand-Pushed Embroidery
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Today, with the rapid development of science and technology, the improvement of machine efficiency and the diversification of decorative forms, the traditional embroidery process is facing a huge impact. Although the traditional handicraft with temperature and soul has strong vitality, it should also keep pace with The Times, and use efficient modern science and technology to inherit and continue the life of traditional handicraft. Throughout the long history, the development of science and technology also drives the progress of many folk crafts. Whether it is the birth of new materials, the research and development of new technologies, are continuously providing material conditions and technical support for folk crafts, promoting the development of science and technology at the same time, but also promote the research and development of new products, the two should complement each other. By taking Suzhou embroidery as the starting point, this paper systematically analyzes the characteristics of hand-pushed embroidery itself (Shen & Huan, 2010), explores the innovation and replacement of pattern themes, and carries out in-depth analysis for the sustainable development of hand-pushed embroidery and the adjustments needed to meet the needs of market dynamics.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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.
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".