MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7146820899

徳島城博物館所蔵・蜂須賀家伝来染織品調査報告

2024· article· ja· W7146820899 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Iwao Nagasaki

Bibliographic record

VenueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageja
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFashion and Cultural Textiles
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeriod (music)ClothingLate 19th centuryQuarter (Canadian coin)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

From July 31st (Monday) to August 3rd (Thursday), 2023, the Laboratory of Textile Culture of the Department of Textile and Clothing did an academic survey (complete survey) of costumes inherited from the Hachisuka family of the Tokushima Domain at the Tokushima Prefectural Tokushima Castle Museum. The research was conducted in the following order: womenʼs clothing, menʼs clothing, childrenʼs clothing, and fukusa from the Edo period. As a result, for womenʼs clothing, three uchikake, two kosode, one furisode, one katabira, and one hitoe from the late Edo period and first half of the 19th century were found, as well as two obi sash from the first half of the 19th century. was also confirmed. As for menʼs clothing, three sets of kamishimo, one kataginu, one hakama, and three noshime were found. There are a large number of childrenʼs clothing. 18 items, of which 14 items are for baby and small child are four-piece items. Furthermore, when categorized by gender, 12 items were for boys and 6 items were for girls. Four of the fukusa coverlet were made in the late Edo period and first half of the 19th century, two were made in the late Edo period in the mid-19th century, and two were made in the mid-Meiji period and late 19th century.

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)0.000
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: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.110

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0330.006

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.231 · 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 designObservational
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 venueInstitutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB)Same topicFashion and Cultural TextilesFrench-language works237,207