MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2488168742 · doi:10.1057/9781137298454_5

Wartime Cooperation: The Early Cases of Nuclear Sharing

2014· book-chapter· en· W2488168742 on OpenAlexaffabout
Julian Schofield

Bibliographic record

VenuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · 2014
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicTwentieth Century Scientific Developments
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNuclear weaponGermanGovernment (linguistics)World War IIPolitical scienceNuclear plantEconomic historyHistoryEngineeringLawArchaeologyNuclear engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The earliest instances of nuclear sharing were among Allied and Axis peer states during the Second World War. They consisted of non-nuclear states passing on early details of the possibility of nuclear weapons. France’s scientific community was the most advanced in comprehensive nuclear research, and as early as the spring of 1939 had considered testing a nuclear device in North Africa. 1 Immediately prior to the German invasion of France in 1940, French nuclear technical knowledge was passed on to the British. Five French nuclear scientists, including Bertrand Goldschmidt, fled to the UK, and continued to do nuclear research there and in Canada, ancillary to but outside of the Manhattan Project. 2 They had evacuated to the UK nuclear research equipment and 185 kg of heavy water from the laboratory of Frederic Joliot-Curie before the Germans could complete their May, 1940 invasion. 3 The French government had also managed to hide a significant quantity of uranium in Morocco beyond the reach of the Germans, British or US, for use after the war. 4 These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

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)0.003
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.035

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0130.022
Scholarly communication0.0060.007
Open science0.0020.012
Research integrity0.0030.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.177 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2014
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePalgrave Macmillan UK eBooksSame topicTwentieth Century Scientific DevelopmentsFrench-language works237,207