Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Soviet Union’s interpretation of appeasement asserts that Chamberlain’s real aim is to strangle the Soviet Union with nazi hands and wear out the forces of Germany as Britain’s imperialist rival. In contrast to it, the general interpretations of West which denied the Soviet Union’s view that Chamberlain had given Germany a free hand in the Central and East Europe have argued that Chamberlain’s real object was to save the peace at any price. But Chamberlain thought that the general settlement with Germany is the order of first priority of British policy. Why? On the pretext of preserving the West Civilization as the two pillars of European peace and buttresses against communism, Chamberlain wanted to divide the sphere of interest with Germany in order to dominate the World. Thus Chamberlain tried secretly to give Germany a free hand through the Hitler-Halifax talks, the Hitler-Henderson talks and Horace Wilson on condition of the peaceful settlement. In particular, Chamberlain agreed tacitly Hitler’s insistence on the free hand in eastern Europe at the Berchtesgaden Conference arranged in order to solve the Munich Crisis. Chamberlain revealed this fact to the British Cabinet meeting on 3 May 1939. Also Paul Schmidt’s memoirs confirmed that the problem of the free hand was referred to at the Godesberg Conference. But Chamberlain did not inform the tacit acceptance of the free hand to the British Cabinet during the Munich Crisis. Thus it is difficult to deny the fact that Chamberlain aimed to get rid of the Soviet Union through the problem of the free hand. We can argue that Chamberlain’s idee fixe is to set Germany against the Soviet Union. Thus after the invasion of Czechoslovakia by German troops, Chamberlain had continued the policy of appeasement in order to accomplish the general settlement with Germany.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.040 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".