Bibliographic record
Abstract
Music in World War I played an important role in cementing the transatlantic alliance among Anglophone and Francophone allies. Chapters 1–5 consider responses to the war by five individuals from three countries: Frank Bridge, Charles Ives, Claude Debussy, John Philip Sousa, and Irving Berlin. Chapters 6–10 gradually expand the focus to ever larger groups of people: women theatre organists in the United States, the Longleat community in England, the greater citizenry of Canada, the service flag and Gold Star mother movements throughout the United States, and the global population devastated by the influenza epidemic. A “prelude,” “interlude,” and “postlude,” which provide context and supplemental material, are co-authored by the three editors, who speak as representatives of England, Canada, and the United States. The whole demonstrates not only the importance of musical exchanges and influences in shaping transatlantic support for the war effort but also the range of contributions made—from unknown amateurs to major composers, from local communities to international populations, and from regions that span a third of the globe.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.015 | 0.000 |
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.
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 teacher head, 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".