Skip to content
OpenTrain AIFor AI Companies
← Back to explorer

Predicting Poets' Origins from Verse: A Computational Analysis of Regional Linguistic Fingerprints in the Complete Tang Poems

Chi-Sheng Chen, Hung-Yun Liu · Jun 23, 2026 · Citations: 0

How to use this page

Low trust

Use this as background context only. Do not make protocol decisions from this page alone.

Best use

Background context only

What to verify

Validate the evaluation procedure and quality controls in the full paper before operational use.

Evidence quality

Low

Derived from extracted protocol signals and abstract evidence.

Abstract

We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work. Aggregating every poem attributed to each author in the Complete Tang Poems (Quan Tang Shi) and linking poets to their administrative circuit of origin via the China Biographical Database (CBDB), we build a poet-level corpus of 357 poets across the ten Tang circuits and frame origin prediction as multi-class classification. Using character $n$-gram TF-IDF together with interpretable domain features (imagery, season, and allusion), classical and neural models predict a poet's broad region (South vs.\ North) at $0.69$ accuracy, well above the $0.53$ majority baseline, and finer circuit-level origin above chance. Beyond classification, three findings emerge. (i) Linguistic distance between circuits grows with geographic distance (Mantel $r=0.40$, $p\approx0.09$ over nine circuits), evidence of a distance-decay effect in poetic language. (ii) The signal interacts with time: South/North separability is at chance in the High Tang and strongest in the Late Tang, consistent with court-driven homogenization at the empire's height followed by regional divergence. (iii) The model's confident errors are historically meaningful -- in the Early Tang, every misclassification is a southern poet read as northern, reflecting the prestige of the northern court idiom. We further show that, when given the whole corpus through a hierarchical frozen-encoder representation, a classical-Chinese transformer (GuwenBERT) only matches -- not beats -- simple TF-IDF, and that combining them adds nothing, indicating that character $n$-grams already capture the regional signal. Our results position interpretable machine learning as a hypothesis generator for literary history.

Abstract-only analysis — low confidence

All signals on this page are inferred from the abstract only and may be inaccurate. Do not use this page as a primary protocol reference.

  • This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.
  • The available metadata is too thin to trust this as a primary source.

Should You Rely On This Paper?

This paper is adjacent to HFEPX scope and is best used for background context, not as a primary protocol reference.

Best use

Background context only

Use if you need

A secondary eval reference to pair with stronger protocol papers.

Main weakness

This paper looks adjacent to evaluation work, but not like a strong protocol reference.

Trust level

Low

Usefulness score

0/100 • Low

Treat as adjacent context, not a core eval-method reference.

Human Feedback Signal

Not explicit in abstract metadata

Evaluation Signal

Detected

Usefulness for eval research

Adjacent candidate

Extraction confidence 35%

What We Could Verify

These are the protocol signals we could actually recover from the available paper metadata. Use them to decide whether this paper is worth deeper reading.

Human Feedback Types

missing

None explicit

No explicit feedback protocol extracted.

"We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work."

Evaluation Modes

partial

Automatic Metrics

Includes extracted eval setup.

"We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work."

Quality Controls

missing

Not reported

No explicit QC controls found.

"We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work."

Benchmarks / Datasets

missing

Not extracted

No benchmark anchors detected.

"We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work."

Reported Metrics

partial

Accuracy

Useful for evaluation criteria comparison.

"Using character $n$-gram TF-IDF together with interpretable domain features (imagery, season, and allusion), classical and neural models predict a poet's broad region (South vs.\ North) at $0.69$ accuracy, well above the $0.53$ majority baseline, and finer circuit-level origin above chance."

Human Feedback Details

  • Uses human feedback: No
  • Feedback types: None
  • Rater population: Not reported
  • Expertise required: General

Evaluation Details

  • Evaluation modes: Automatic Metrics
  • Agentic eval: None
  • Quality controls: Not reported
  • Evidence quality: Low
  • Use this page as: Background context only

Protocol And Measurement Signals

Benchmarks / Datasets

No benchmark or dataset names were extracted from the available abstract.

Reported Metrics

accuracy

Research Brief

Metadata summary

We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work.

Based on abstract + metadata only. Check the source paper before making high-confidence protocol decisions.

Key Takeaways

  • We ask whether the geographic origin of Tang-dynasty poets leaves a detectable linguistic trace in their work.
  • Aggregating every poem attributed to each author in the Complete Tang Poems (Quan Tang Shi) and linking poets to their administrative circuit of origin via the China Biographical Database (CBDB), we build a poet-level corpus of 357 poets across the ten Tang circuits and frame origin prediction as multi-class classification.
  • Using character $n$-gram TF-IDF together with interpretable domain features (imagery, season, and allusion), classical and neural models predict a poet's broad region (South vs.\ North) at $0.69$ accuracy, well above the $0.53$ majority baseline, and finer circuit-level origin above chance.

Researcher Actions

  • Compare this paper against nearby papers in the same arXiv category before using it for protocol decisions.
  • Validate inferred eval signals (Automatic metrics) against the full paper.
  • Use related-paper links to find stronger protocol-specific references.

Caveats

  • Generated from abstract + metadata only; no PDF parsing.
  • Signals below are heuristic and may miss details reported outside the abstract.

Recommended Queries

Research Summary

Contribution Summary

  • Using character n-gram TF-IDF together with interpretable domain features (imagery, season, and allusion), classical and neural models predict a poet's broad region (South vs.\ North) at 0.69 accuracy, well above the 0.53 majority baseline,…

Why It Matters For Eval

  • Abstract shows limited direct human-feedback or evaluation-protocol detail; use as adjacent methodological context.

Researcher Checklist

  • Gap: Human feedback protocol is explicit

    No explicit human feedback protocol detected.

  • Pass: Evaluation mode is explicit

    Detected: Automatic Metrics

  • Gap: Quality control reporting appears

    No calibration/adjudication/IAA control explicitly detected.

  • Gap: Benchmark or dataset anchors are present

    No benchmark/dataset anchor extracted from abstract.

  • Pass: Metric reporting is present

    Detected: accuracy

Related Papers

Papers are ranked by protocol overlap, extraction signal alignment, and semantic proximity.