Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the summer of 1918, a Polish Army of approximately 100,000 had been assembled in France to fight on the Western Front. This army, rapidly gathered from the most disparate areas of the world, was under the direction of the Polish National Committee [Komitet Narodowy Polski KNP] head quartered in Paris. The existence of the army enormously strengthened the claims of the KNP on the attention of the Allies, eventually resulting in recognition of the Committee as virtually a Polish provisional government-in exile.1 Shortly after the war, the bulk of this army was shipped to Poland where it played a significant role in shaping the emergence of the reborn Polish state. Despite is relatively small size, the Polish Army formed in the West gave the Warsaw government a cadre of trained and experienced soldiers at a time when military force was the decisive factor in establishing borders and sovereignty from amidst the chaos of the collapse of the Russian Empire and the subsequent civil war, and the emergence of several national states from the borderlands nationalities of the former czarist empire.2 The goal of this article is to demonstrate the large role played by Canada in the origins and development of this Polish army. Although the army is understandably traced to the decree of the French government of June 1917, and the bulk of the recruits came from the American Polonia, it was Canada where it was largely trained and organized. Moreover, Ottawa was often the center of the negotiations preceding its establishment and the Canadians were probably the first to support the idea of an independent Polish force in the West. Hence, this essay is an effort to elucidate the important role played by Canada in this important chapter in the rebirth of Poland.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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".