Le conflit franco-italien dans les Balkans 1915-1935.: Le rôle de la Yougoslavie
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The conflict between France and Italy in the Balkans in fact was an attempt at reorganizing the Balkans and Central Europe following the disappearance of the Habsburg and Romanoff. The two Latin powers now had a unique opportunity to dictate a rearrangement of the Balkans, but their positions were diametrically opposed. Italy sought to establish domination in the Adriatic and the Balkans, whereas France sought to reorganize the region with the view to precluding Germany from recovering its former influence. At the same time, after Wilson?s political defeat in the Senate in 1919 Italian guarantees of the French-German border became vitally important to France. A compromise between Paris and Rome turned out to be unfeasible for several reasons. Expansionism of both the last liberal governments and Mussolini met with resolute opposition from Belgrade. Moreover, Paris was convinced that Italian domination not only would not bring stability to the Balkans, but on the contrary, that it would shatter the region?s Little Entente-based inner cohesion and facilitate Germany?s comeback. Thus most of diplomatic initiatives coming from Paris and Rome were mutually neutralized while German economic influence in the region irresistibly grew from the early 1930s. The agreement Mussolini-Laval reconciled the two Latin powers but it was now in the new circumstances created by the rise of Nazi Germany as a dominant force in Central Europe and the Balkans.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".