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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article presents the original draft of the Zimmermann telegram from 1917 in facsimile. Its various annotations provide interesting insights, such as the idea to promise California to Japan and instructions concerning transmission and encryption. Further documents clarify how the telegram was sent and put various alternatives suggested in the literature to rest. The political background and fallout in Germany are discussed, as well. Keywords: codebookcryptanalysisFirst World WarRoom 40Zimmermann telegram Acknowledgments The author is grateful for kind permission by the German foreign office to publish the draft telegrams, and to Maria Keipert for her help with obtaining important material from its archive and for correcting several errors. Many thanks for help with transcribing the text, identifying the initiallers, and interpreting the sequence of the initials go to Bernd Mütter and Klaus Saul. Peter Freeman kindly sent me his manuscript, the British 13040 codebook, and interesting insights into German cryptographic procedures. I enjoyed interesting discussions with Joachim von zur Gathen, my father. Jamshid Shokrollahi helped with the photographs, and Claudia Jakob and Martina Kuhnert worked tirelessly on procuring documents and typesetting the text. Reinhard Doerries provided helpful comments. Very special thanks go to David Kahn for encouragement, careful reading, and many useful suggestions, in particular bringing me together with Peter Freeman, who was simultaneously writing his article, and Thomas Boghardt.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 it