MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1534343424

Faith, Hope and Love: The Wartime Motivations of Lance Corporal Frederick Spratlin, MM and Bar, 3rd Battalion, CEF

2006· article· en· W1534343424 on OpenAlexaffabout
Michelle Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMilitary History and Strategy
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBar (unit)FaithTheologyPsychologyPhilosophyPhysicsMeteorology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In an attempt to understand the motivations that drive soldiers in war, historians often seek to capture the experience of an individual soldier through his letters, diaries and other personal accounts. But what of the artifacts that are left behind? The personal effects that arrive home to a family after a soldier’s death, neatly labeled and wrapped in yellowed paper. These also have a story to tell. Lance Corporal Spratlin, from Toronto, was killed during the Battle of Amiens in 1918. Today his remains lie in the Toronto Cemetery in France, but following his death one of his most treasured possessions was returned to his family—a small pocket-sized Bible. The condition of the Bible alone suggests something about the man who owned it. A gift from his daughter before he left for war, the Bible is worn, the leather is soft, the pages are so curled they stick together and the words New Testament are faded almost beyond recognition. To this day, 90 years after it was issued, the Bible is permanently bowed, an indication of its place in a soldier’s breast pocket. It is inside the back cover that we gain a clear insight into how a man endures the horrors of war. Penned in Spratlin’s clear, unmistakable handwriting are references to many biblical passages, 11 of them with a corresponding facet of war beside it.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.798
Threshold uncertainty score0.797

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.203 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations3
Published2006
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)Same topicMilitary History and StrategyFrench-language works237,207