MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6962911160 · doi:10.17613/sfcd0-e9r49

'Action Buddhism' in the Medieval Chinese Empire,

2024· article· en· W6962911160 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChinese history and philosophy
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBuddhismEmpireGovernment (linguistics)Context (archaeology)State (computer science)Normative

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay will focus mostly on the Tang dynastic empire (618–907 CE), a "second wave" empire as defined in the Introduction to this volume, and its relations with Buddhism, although it will be necessary to say something about earlier Chinese dynasties and about other religions. As we shall see, an awareness of history permeates the relationship between the Tang imperium and the Buddhist establishment; both parties were well informed as to what had happened between them before and tried to act accordingly. I will first give an overview of the normative state of relations between the Tang imperial government and the Buddhist church and supply some background on the historical context in which those relations occurred. I will then indicate what I see as the recurrent problems and potential benefits of the relationship (an issue common to empires and religions, as noted in the Introduction), mostly from the perspective of the Tang rulers. Then, I will examine the strategies adopted by the state

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.043
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.012
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.054
GPT teacher head0.312
Teacher spread0.258 · 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 designNot applicable
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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueKnowledge Commons (Lakehead University)Same topicChinese history and philosophyFrench-language works237,207