MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2156339846 · doi:10.1017/s0963926808005981

The illustrated press under siege: technological imagination in the Paris siege, 1870–1871

2009· article· en· W2156339846 on OpenAlexaff
Michèle Martin, Christopher Bodnar

Bibliographic record

VenueUrban History · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural Analysis
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSiegeDemocracyArtArt historySociologyHistoryPolitical scienceLawPoliticsAncient history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

ABSTRACT During the Franco-Prussian War, Paris was besieged by the Prussians from the middle of September 1870 until the end of January 1871. During most of the period, the main means of transportation – railways, roads, telegraph, bridges, etc. – were cut off by the Prussians. This article shows that, given the elimination of the main means of diffusion of news, some novel strategies were used to preserve a democratic distribution of information. An analysis of the content of four illustrated periodicals – The Illustrated London News and The Graphic in London and L'Illustration and Le Monde Illustré in Paris – shows that innovative methods involving such things as the balloon and the carrier pigeon were used to circulate news inside and outside the fortifications of Paris and beyond the surrounding Prussian army. The article also demonstrates that while this distribution had a different form from that occurring in normal situations, it did not prevent the papers from reaching a balance among the various issues related to the war and covered by their content.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.032
Threshold uncertainty score0.150

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0100.027
Scholarly communication0.0120.004
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.029
GPT teacher head0.204
Teacher spread0.175 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUrban HistorySame topicHistorical Studies and Socio-cultural AnalysisFrench-language works237,207