History and Justice: Paradigms of the Prosecution of Nazi Crimes
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The confluence of two distinct disciplines—history and justice—in the investigation and prosecution of Nazi war crimes and crimes against humanity has been the subject of controversy since the Nuremberg International Military Tribunal. Particularly controversial, and often poorly understood, is the role of historians in the trials of National Socialist perpetrators of genocide. Addressing this issue in its philosophical, methodological and practical dimensions, this article details the interaction of history and justice in Nazi crimes prosecutions at Nuremberg and in the Ludwigsburg-initiated West-German proceedings. Although the objectives and modi operandi of the two disciplines are dissimilar, a comparative analysis demonstrates that both law and justice benefited from this interaction. Jurists could not do without history and, in the service of justice, historians fashioned and refashioned the historiography of the Holocaust.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it