Bibliographic record
Abstract
The chinese community in Japan in the Bakumatsu and early Meiji periods had its origins in two distinct sources. One was the survival, in tradition and to some extent in form, of the Chinese quarter (the Tōjin yashiki ) and the Chinese guild of traders at Nagasaki. The Dutch presence and trade at Nagasaki during the sakoku period is well known outside Japan, but little is known about the Chinese. Yet the Chinese were the more important group in many ways. Chinese trade was more important in terms of the amounts involved and in the numbers of men and ships which took part. Up to the 1680s, hundreds of Chinese ships arrived at Nagasaki each year, and there was a large Chinese community established permanently on shore. From then onwards, it is true, the trade and numbers of the Chinese were both restricted, especially from the second decade of the eighteenth century, yet both still remained larger than those of the Dutch. The Dutch enclave at Nagasaki ended with the opening of the treaty ports to Western settlers in the 1850s and in particular with the Dutch treaty of January 1856. The old system of trade with China and the Chinese settlement at Nagasaki continued, however, into the new era. 2
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".