Bibliographic record
Abstract
By the beginning of June it was evident that the early Anglo-French attempts to reach a solution had failed. The mild warnings offered and the calls for conciliation had proved ineffectual. Equally, the policy of drift was becoming less and less a viable option and in Geneva the League procedures could not be bypassed indefinitely. The dilemma facing France and Britain deepened as the crisis moved towards its climax: Italian troops continued to pour into East Africa, the rainy season approached its end, while pro-League opinion at home and abroad became increasingly concerned with what was fast coming to be seen as a test case. Inevitably the British and French Governments, both recently reshuffled under Baldwin and Laval, were forced to take a fresh look at the crisis and to consider a more positive approach. Throughout the summer of 1935 the hope remained that the awkward choice between Italy and the League could somehow be avoided and that open hostilities could be prevented. At the same time policies were also developed and intensified: concessions to Italy were increased and, very tentatively, the coercive functions of the League considered for the first time. These policies were not, however, taken to their logical conclusions for some months. If the heightening crisis began to push London and Paris away from their previous drift, both moved only reluctantly and marginally from their early inertia. 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.007 |
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".