MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2970191843 · doi:10.15353/kinema.vi.1010

Aleksander Ford and Film Censorship in Poland

2003· article· en· W2970191843 on OpenAlex
Anna Misiak

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

VenueKinema A Journal for Film and Audiovisual Media · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolish Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensorshipMovie theaterIdeologyFilm directorLawAutonomyPolitical scienceSpanish Civil WarPoliticsArtArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

POLITICALLY INVOLVED FILMMAKER: ALEKSANDER FORD AND FILM CENSORSHIP IN POLAND AFTER 1945 AFTER World War II civil rights were restricted in Poland as in most of the countries that fell into the zone of Soviet influence. Polish citizens experienced censorship in almost every field of their daily existence. Within the film industry censorship did not function solely as a means of checking final products from the standpoint of ideology. The controlling machine was not only the domain of the Party itself, even though its officials held decisive voice in restricting the autonomy of artists. The highly elaborate system also involved many moviemakers, who often proved to be very efficient in establishing methods of censorship and propaganda within Polish cinema. There was no clear-cut division between the Party and the filmmakers. Both groups became mixed, and the latter often willingly cooperated with the first. Just after the war there was...

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 categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.562
Threshold uncertainty score0.532

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.285 · 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