Bibliographic record
Abstract
Simply put, 1925 was not a good year to be a Wobbly. Indeed, we have reached the point in our study where many, in the words of the I .W.W. website, “sectarian Leftist historians … end their histories of the IWW.” The website goes on in a protesting tone: “Such histories are an injustice to the IWW, particularly following 1924” (“Chronology of IWW History”). One of the key talents of I .W.W. chronologists and historians is making the Wobblies appear to be a constant and active presence long past what might at first appear to be their expiration date. Nevertheless, even indefatigable I .W.W. chronicler Fred Thompson had a hard time writing about 1925, pretty much drawing a blank from the 1924 split until the 1927 protest demonstrations centered around the Sacco-Vanzetti executions. As Thompson admits, “progress was inconspicuous” (Thompson The I.W.W. 152). The I .W.W. website fares little better in terms of highlighting 1925, noting that the Philadelphia MTW went to the ILA (i.e., the Marine Transport Workers defected to the International Longshoreman’s Association) over the 1924 split, and recording an I.W.W.-led coal miners’ strike in Alberta. 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 | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.019 | 0.016 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.002 |
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.
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".