MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3207330145 · doi:10.1515/ejss-2021-2038

„I dette sataniske Evangelium“

2021· article· en· W3207330145 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Daniel Nagelstutz

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Journal of Scandinavian Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicIndigenous Studies and Ecology
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNazismEliteChauvinismGermanDanishIdeologyPoliticsState (computer science)Power (physics)Political scienceSympathySociologyHistoryLawPhilosophyArchaeologyPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract During the Second World War, a few well-educated Greenlanders from the Danish colonies of Godthåb and Holsteinsborg expressed their sympathy for Nazi Germany. However, the background of the political turmoil within the Greenlandic elite remains largely unknown. This article presents the state of research and previously unknown sources on the Nazi riots in Greenland. In a subsequent step, potential motives for the movement will be discussed. So far, researchers have ruled out that Greenlanders were aware of the true nature of National Socialism. Instead, the scattered pro-German activities along Greenland’s West coast have been played down as spontaneous acts of provocation and mere political calculus. In fact, the Nazis’ ideology and war crimes were well known to the Greenlanders. In addition, German polar researchers made friends with Greenlandic journalists, teachers and catechists after the Nazi seizure of power. Last not least, the article will examine how Danish discrimination against Greenlanders contributed to the Greenlandic chauvinism displayed by a few members of the Inuit elite.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.036

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.421
Teacher spread0.313 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations0
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Journal of Scandinavian StudiesSame topicIndigenous Studies and EcologyFrench-language works237,207