MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2305663287 · doi:10.4000/ifha.2250

Petersson, Niels P., Anarchie und Weltrecht. Das deutsche Reich und die Institutionen der Weltwirtschaft 1890-1930

2013· article· de· W2305663287 on OpenAlexaff
Jean-François Eck

Bibliographic record

VenueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en Allemagne · 2013
Typearticle
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsInstitut d'Histoire de l'Amérique Française
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPhilosophyHumanities

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet ouvrage, issu d'un mémoire d'habilitation à diriger des recherches, examine la part prise par l'Allemagne à la construction de l'ordre économique international, de la fin du XIXe siècle jusqu'aux difficultés annonciatrices de la crise des années 1930.Il recourt pour ce faire à la correspondance diplomatique allemande, aux archives d'organisations internationales comme la deuxième conférence de la paix de La Haye en 1907, le Comité économique de la Société des Nations, la Chambre de commerce internationale, mais aussi aux ouvrages de doctrine des économistes et juristes contemporains, en particulier les spécialistes allemands de droit international privé comme Arthur Nussbaum ou Auguste Sartorius von Waltershausen.La première partie de l'ouvrage est consacrée aux problèmes posés par le défaut de paiement des États débiteurs, la seconde à la mise en place des instances régulatrices du droit commercial international.Se rattachant aux travaux de l'école institutionnaliste en histoire économique (Douglass North), l'analyse se situe dans la perspective de ceux réalisés en Allemagne par des auteurs comme Jürgen Osterhammel, Peter Borscheid, Stefan Conrad, Boris Barth, Guido Thiemeyer.

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)0.001
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.065
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.009
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.253 · 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 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

Citations0
Published2013
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueRevue de l’Institut français d’histoire en AllemagneSame topicEuropean history and politicsFrench-language works237,207