Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le dernier ouvrage de K.C., Bismarcks Außenpolitik 1870-1890 (1ère édition, 2004) reprend le titre bien connu d'Andreas Hillgruber (1972, réédition en 1993) mais là s'arrête la comparaison.Certes l'auteur ne surprendra pas par son approche : la politique extérieure de l'Allemagne impériale se confond avec les intentions, les desseins, les calculs, les reculs de son fondateur et chancelier Bismarck.Et si les aspects économiques et sociaux prennent un peu plus de place au fil de l'analyse, cela ne remet pas en cause la méthode classique de l'auteur.Traditionnel aussi le plan chronologique en trois moments : 1870-1879 (naissance du Reich et d'une situation « semihégémonique ») ; 1879-1885 (temps d'une relative sécurité) ; 1885-1890 (période où les crises s'accumulent suscitant des expédients peu satisfaisants).L'originalité de l'auteur n'est pas davantage dans l'utilisation de concepts plus ou moins complexes.Il ne semble d'ailleurs pas au premier abord formuler explicitement de nouvelle thèse sur la diplomatie bismarckienne.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.006 |
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".