Bibliographic record
Abstract
To me Mao was like God, I believed that he was not only the great leader of the Chinese people, but also the great leader of people throughout the world. I feared the day when he would no longer be with us. I really hoped there'd be a scientific breakthrough that would enable young people like us to voluntarily give up a year of our lives to add a minute to his. Dai Qing, adopted daughter of Marshal Ye Jianying, recalling the sentiments of young princesses and princes of the party and other urban youth at the onset of the Cultural Revolution in 1966 The general attitude of the masses [during the 1976 Tiananmen crisis] was anger at the unfair treatment of [Premier] Zhou Enlai, antipathy toward the [Politburo] radicals, and difficulty in comprehending the government's behavior. But it is hard to describe sentiment toward Mao himself. There was dissatisfaction and anger over his support for the “gang of four” and the treatment of the Premier, but at the same time a continuing deep faith in Mao. A businessman's recollection concerning his experiences as a young factory worker who regularly visited Tiananmen Square, January–April 1976 Chairman Mao's great feats are enduring. Chinese history has proved that … only Chairman Mao could have led us to victory. Without Chairman Mao, there would be no new China. [His] … greatness cannot be overestimated.… Chairman Mao was not without shortcomings and mistakes. Yet they are insignificant when compared to his great feats.… [It is wrong to say that, like Stalin], he had [only] 70 percent achievements and 30 percent mistakes. […]
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.006 |
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.
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".