The Law of Unintended Consequences: The Dichotomy of Gender Roles During the Great War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Chapter One -Introduction-Few events have reshaped the world as the Great War did.Not only did World War One take the lives of millions of young men, from almost every continent, the war is also responsible for altering the landscape and drawing new European borders.Because of the profound reshaping of empires, political ideology, national and international relations, and a generation of young men and women who were intensely changed by the war, scholars from almost every field, including history, sociology, psychology, and political science have studied both the war and its lasting effects.Much of the research in recent years has been based on the personal experiences of the men in the trenches and has been learned through extensive readings of the letters these men sent home to loved ones, and the letters the soldiers received.Public interest in this particular field stems from the gravity of such a momentous event.World War One is still researched, taught, and debated.Much has been written about the Great War, as it was called at the time; however, finding research that advanced the particular topic of this thesis was difficult.It was crucial to research soldiers and their experiences in the trenches to establish how life was for many men.It seemed logical to start with soldiers' letters, but soldiers' letters from almost every country, and every branch of the military, have survived, so how do we narrow it down?It was strenuous to reduce the research to a particular country, Canada, and to a particular soldier, John Jack Davey.Canada was selected for several reasons: Canada was a satellite of the British Empire, one of the main world powers at the onset of the war; Canadians became involved in the war early on as a result of the close affiliation with Britain; the vast distance between Canada and the Western Front in France played a larger role in the
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 | 0.010 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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 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".