Letter from Eileen Chang to C.T. Hsia, 1988
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A letter from Eileen Chang to C.T. Hsia, 1988. In this letter dated April 6, Eileen Chang mentions that she lived in Valleys recent years and moved frequently and saw the skin doctor and detistor. She also says that she would like to write a article about the war between human beings and insects. She also talks about the letter from Zheng Xulei and Shui Jing's article. The envelope has USPS domestic-stamp with dated stamp of 8 Apr 1988 Los Angeles is addressed to "Professor C.T. Hsia, 415 W. 115th St., Apt. 22, New York, N.Y. 10025" from address "Reyher, 245 So. Reno St., Apt. 9, Los Angeles, CA 90057."; 張愛玲寄給夏志清的信,1988. 這封信註明4月6日寫的. 張愛玲信中提到這兩年住在郊區,常搬家,看皮膚醫生和牙醫. 有意寫人虫大戰的文章. 信中另提到鄭緒雷的信,水晶的文章. 信封上有一張國內的郵票, 郵政戳印日期為1988年4月8日于加州洛杉磯, 並有收件人地址"Professor C.T. Hsia, 415 W. 115th St., Apt. 22, New York, N.Y. 10025" 及寄件人地址"Reyher, 245 So. Reno St., Apt. 9, Los Angeles, CA 90057."
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.203 | 0.090 |
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".