MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2061090824 · doi:10.1177/0265691411399247

Language, Regional Identity and the Failure of the Left in the Moselle Département, 1871-1936

2011· article· en· W2061090824 on OpenAlexaff
Louisa Zanoun

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean History Quarterly · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicHistorical Geopolitical and Social Dynamics
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersLondon School of Economics and Political Science
KeywordsAlliancePoliticsGermanContext (archaeology)SovereigntyWorking classIdentity (music)Left-wing politicsPopulationFront (military)Economic historyPolitical scienceSociologyHistoryLawGeographyArchaeologyDemographyArtAesthetics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In 1934, the French left joined forces for the first time to form the Popular Front, a left-wing alliance whose credo was born of an antifascist imperative. The Moselle, located in the north-eastern corner of France, seemed likely to make an important contribution to the formation of this alliance. The département, which returned to French sovereignty in 1918 after 47 years of German domination, was one of France’s most heavily-industrialized regions and counted a large working-class population in its steelworks and mines. As this study demonstrates, however, the Moselle’s industrial workers took little part in left-wing social and political movements and massively supported the Catholic right and the far right during the interwar period. It was not until the national strike movement in June 1936 that they became involved in left-wing social and political activities. As this study argues, a series of key factors pertaining to the Moselle’s distinct historical, linguistic and cultural context were decisive in shaping the political character of the département and preventing the Mosellan left from mobilizing the support of the working classes.

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 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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.851
Threshold uncertainty score0.645

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.260
Teacher spread0.221 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean History QuarterlySame topicHistorical Geopolitical and Social DynamicsFrench-language works237,207