Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pierre Laval acknowledged that he had made broad claims in court that he lacked influence or standing in the Pétain regime. How, he asked, did it happen that the day after the adoption of the constitutional acts, Laval had been named Petain&s;s successor or, as he put it more elegantly, his heir presumptive. Petain at the time had been eighty-four or eighty-five. He could die or be incapacitated. There had to be some recognition of this in the constitutional acts and, Laval maintained, had he written into these laws that in the case of Petain&s;s death or disability, he, Laval, would succeed him, he was certain that Parliament would have agreed. Mongibeaux accepted Laval&s;s plea and returned to the use that had been made of the constitutional acts. How could anyone believe, Laval insisted, that he would accept Germany hegemony. The point of all of this was that Laval had always thrived in the rough and tumble of elective politics.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".