MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2774177586 · doi:10.3138/gsi.11.1.01

Starvation and Its Political Use in the Armenian Genocide

2017· article· en· W2774177586 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueGenocide Studies International · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCambodian History and Society
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStarvationGenocideArmenianPoliticsNazismCriminologyPolitical scienceThe HolocaustIdentity (music)Ottoman empireLawSociologyHistoryAncient historyMedicineArtInternal medicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Starvation is widely recognized as a weapon of extreme mass violence, a gross violation of human rights, and a crime in international criminal law, yet forced starvation is still practiced today. Starvation was used as a political tool against Ukraine in the Holodomor, was part of Nazi strategy during World War II, and is one of the most readily identified aspects of the Armenian Genocide in the Ottoman Empire during the period 1915 to 1923. This study examines how starvation was used by the Young Turk regime as a deliberate policy against the Armenians, the Armenians' experience of starvation, and why starvation was chosen as a tool of genocide. Starvation was highly effective in the large number of Armenians that perished, and was deliberately chosen as a method of killing, partly for plausible deniability and partly for the prolonged suffering it caused, resulting in the eradication of Armenian identity.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.780
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.162
GPT teacher head0.417
Teacher spread0.254 · 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