Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the Battle of the Alps of June 1940, which pitted the Italian Regio Esercito against the French Armée des Alpes. Fearing that an early capitulation of France to the German invasion that had begun in May would prevent Italy from sharing the spoils of victory, Mussolini ordered an offensive against France on 15 June 1940. Despite the battle raging in the north, the French Army successfully repelled the attacking force and the Italian assault petered out after a few days, with no significant victories and few territorial gains. Aside from the difficulties of crossing the Alpine mountain range, a geographical feature the French had strongly fortified, the Italian campaign was hindered by poor strategy, ineffective tactics, an outdated military doctrine that failed to acknowledge the importance of combined arms warfare, and appallingly inadequate materiel owing to the erosion of the Italian military industrial base in the 1930s. In fact, the Battle of the Alps set the tone for the overall disappointing military campaign of the Regio Esercito in the Second World War, as the Italian army never fully recovered from its dismal start.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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; 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".