MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2790501100 · doi:10.1093/ehr/cey054

A History of UNESCO: Global Actions and Impact, ed. Poul Duedahl

2018· article· en· W2790501100 on OpenAlexaff
Heidi Tworek

Bibliographic record

VenueThe English Historical Review · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeaguePolitical scienceWorld historyLatin AmericansWork (physics)Library scienceSociologyMedia studiesLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The history of international organisations has become a vibrant field of inquiry over the last decade. Some scholars, such as Susan Pedersen, have argued powerfully for the importance of the League of Nations, an organisation long relegated to the bin of failed attempts to create world peace. Others have turned their attention to how the United Nations and its myriad agencies such as UNESCO created different networks beyond and between Cold War blocs. Yet work on UNESCO has primarily focused on intellectual histories of its initiatives in science, education and culture rather than work on the ground. The volume under review here represents the first work to trace ‘the routes rather than the roots of UNESCO’s initiatives’ (p. 7) and to explore the impact of UNESCO programmes. The book appears as part of the Global History of UNESCO Project funded by the Danish Council of Independent Research and directed by the volume’s editor, Poul Duedahl. The chapters (from an impressively international group of scholars) explore case-studies from around the world, including archaeology in Iraq and Afghanistan (Agnès Borde Meyer), Japanese history textbooks (Aigul Kulnazarova), experts sent to Latin America (Anabella Abarzúa Cutroni), global library initiatives (Miriam Intrator) and Swiss-born ethnographer Alfred Métraux’s production of the UNESCO Courier (Edgardo Crebs).

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 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)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.703
Threshold uncertainty score0.798

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.041
GPT teacher head0.342
Teacher spread0.301 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations1
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe English Historical ReviewSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207