Romanianization of the Cities in Transylvania After 1918. Case Study: Alba Iulia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In a period ranging from the end of the nineteenth century until the first quarter of the next century, territories or provinces whose political affiliation changed were subjected to a form of “nationalization”. Depending on the national specifics of the beneficiary state, this process received names such as “Germanization”, “Frenchification”, “Czechization”, “Slovakization” or “Romanianization”. After eliminating the ambiguities that might designate this last term, the study tried to promote a clear perspective by taking the town of Alba Iulia as the object of a case study. In this situation too, the richness of the sources and the problematics would have led to the elaboration of a text the size of a book. Consequently, the research was circumscribed to identifying the changes some socio-professional groups went through after 1918, including Romanian “economists” (farmers), craftsmen and tradesmen. Furthermore, the superior repositioning or the shaping of some segments of national elites was followed up: lawyers, secondary professors. The present study carries on the research in this area by approaching some cultural, economic and event-based aspects.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".