Bibliographic record
Abstract
The project aimed to examine contemporary Buddhist ecumenicism as increasing interactions among Buddhist communities of three traditions of Buddhism (Mahayana, Theravada, Vajrayana) via fieldwork on Asia and North American sites to discern if new values of ecumenicism are being produced and their content.-REVISED DUE TO COVID 19: The shutdown of international travel and restrictions on social contact for the two years of the pandemic made it impossible to follow the original plan.So, we revised the project to emphasize archival, conceptual, and fieldwork work in Japan on the globalization of Chinese Buddhism, including ecumenical trends.Another aim was to develop a transnational network for the empirical study of contemporary Buddhism.-Conducted archival research on Chinese state promotion of interaction of all three schools of Buddhism in China under the umbrella of "Chinese Buddhism" and efforts to elevate its status in the world vis-à-vis other that of other groups (i.e., Japanese Buddhism, Korean Buddhism, and Theravada Buddhism. -Conducted fieldwork on interactions between schools of Buddhism in Japan andChina.One was the Shingon 真言 Vajrayana school of Buddhism that died out in China, but now China is interested in reviving it in China, and we are studying these aspects.The other was the 黄檗 school, which is historically connected to a lineage to Wanfu Temples 萬福寺 in China.We examined efforts to revive the transnational and its significance as both religious and cultural exchange -Conducted, in the final project year, when fieldwork abroad became possible, field research on Chinese Buddhism in the context of Canadian multiculturalism, focusing on a Chinese Buddhist temple in Toronto running a project to build China's Four Sacred Buddhist Mountains.We identified multiple meanings attached to it as religion and culture.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.025 | 0.008 |
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".