MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2046172629 · doi:10.1080/16161262.2013.755021

French aspirations and Anglo-Saxon suspicions: France, signals intelligence and the UKUSA agreement at the dawn of the Cold War

2013· article· en· W2046172629 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Intelligence History · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntelligence, Security, War Strategy
Canadian institutionsCanadian Forces CollegeRoyal Canadian Navy
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeacetimeCold warAnglo saxonHistoryAncient historySign (mathematics)World War IIEconomic historyPolitical scienceLawArchaeologyPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although France ranked among the victors in 1945 and set about creating a world-class Sigint apparatus as she rose from her ashes, Paris was not invited to sign the 1946 UKUSA Agreement – nor did French leaders want to join the AUSCANUKUS community. Determining how this situation came about is not as straightforward as it seems. France had played a pivotal role in early peacetime Sigint cooperation, the breaking the Enigma and collaboration with Great Britain continued even after the fall of France in 1940. Nevertheless, post-war French ambitions and Anglo-Saxon suspicions prevailed at the dawn of the Cold War, resulting in a unique dynamic between these three powers.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.677
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.038
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.233 · 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