FightingFit? Diet, Disease, and Disability in the Canadian Expeditionary Force, 1914–18
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
In spite of considerable period propaganda to the otherwise, the average member of the Canadian Expeditionary Force was far from a northern superman. Some, in fact, were quite the opposite. A close analysis of enlistment records indicates that majority of Canada’s would-be warriors not only were — as one might expect — of average height and build, but also that many suffered from a wide variety of health concerns ranging from poor eyesight and dentition through to serious musculoskeletal, neurological, and psychiatric disorders. Moreover, evidence suggests that many recruits were poorly nourished. Indeed, despite the very real horrors and dangers that the Great War presented, the enlistment and discharge weights of CEF members suggests that joining the military was actually good for many Canadian males. This analysis is based on summary statistical examination of the medical and attestation papers of over 20,000 servicemen and a close textual analysis of the full file for a smaller number of men.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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