MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2058986096 · doi:10.1353/mon.0.0115

The Atmosphere in the 'Fuhrerbunker.' How to Represent the Last Days of World War II

2009· article· de· W2058986096 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

VenueMonatshefte · 2009
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicItalian Fascism and Post-war Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoriographyNarrativeRepresentation (politics)HistoryContext (archaeology)GermanLiteratureAtmosphere (unit)Narrative historyArt historyCultural historyBoomAestheticsArtPoliticsArchaeologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the context of the recent boom of World War II representations and German remembrance culture, this essay investigates different narrative ways to represent the last days in the <i>Führerbunker</i> in literature, historiography, and film by analyzing Joachim Fest’s popular history book <i>Der Untergang</i> (2002), Oliver Hirschbiegel’s movie <i>Der Untergang</i> (2004), Michael Kloft’s documentary film <i>Tod im Führerbunker</i> (2004), Walter Kempowski’s collage <i>Echolot: Abgesang ’45</i> (2005), and Marcel Beyer’s novel <i>Flughunde</i> (1995). History that seems to be often incomprehensible in its moral dimensions poses the challenge whether a historical representation can reconstruct or must restage the past. This article demonstrates that representational choices are grounded less in questions of genre, media, and the dichotomy between history and fiction, than in the tension between open and closed history, in the involvement of reader and viewer, and in the relationship between a realistic scenic representation and the meta-reflection of historical representation. (SJ)

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.555
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.247 · 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