Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the summer of 1918, after failing to negotiate a new contract with his most important star, Adolph Zukor offered Mary Pickford a quarter of a million dollars to leave the motion picture business.1Given the meagerness of this sum as compared with Pickford's enormous earning capacity at that moment, one might well conclude that Zukor was merely joking. Yet, might this have been a genuine bribe? The Famous Players‐Lasky's chief executive had built his empire upon the exploitation of movie stars like Pickford, and historians of the studio system have long commented upon Zukor's keen involvement in the parallel development of both the feature‐length motion picture and the star system during the late transitional period of 1912 to 1915. In the subsequent period of industrial consolidation, however, Zukor apparently sought to turn his back on the star performer as a business strategy, while he instead pursued theater ownership, the promotion of famous authors, and the production of multiple‐star specials that sought to effectively short‐circuit the authority of the individual star. When Zukor proposed that Pickford stop working in 1918, she and scores of other Hollywood stars were preparing to participate in the fourth Liberty Loan campaign, where their extraordinary earning power would be once again put on display as beneficial to the American troops overseas, to the nation, and ultimately, to the fate of the entire world.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.050 | 0.005 |
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".