Bibliographic record
Abstract
Lode Wils, The creation of the Dutch state and relations with BelgiumParadoxically, the unification of the Netherlands and Belgium in 1815- 1830 did not bring the countries closer together but instead alienated them from each other until the Second World War at least. Holland’s dominance within the United Kingdom of the Netherlands stimulated the spread of liberalism among both the Belgians and the clericalists. Conversely, because they were afraid of being outnumbered by the Belgians (62%) and the Catholics (75%), the protestant elite looked for self-assurance in the authoritarian monarch of William I. Popular sovereignty was persistently rejected for a full quarter of a century until peace was concluded in 1839. The polarizing experience of 1815-1839 had a lasting influence on the national identity of both Belgium and the Netherlands. Indeed it can be said that the major transformation of 1780-1850 continued to leave residual echoes in the same way that the impact of the major transformation of the sixteenth century continued to be felt through the ages (in both Reformational Europe as well as Counter-Reformational Europe). This review is part of the discussion forum 'De metamorfose van Nederland' (N.C.F. van Sas).
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 | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.018 | 0.002 |
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".