MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211230306 · doi:10.1093/jahist/jaab231

“A Fight between Two Systems of Thought”: Gerald B. Winrod and the Kansas Senate Race of 1938

2021· article· en· W4211230306 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kim Phillips‐Fein

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of American History · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAmerican Constitutional Law and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGeorge (robot)Great DepressionDemocracyRace (biology)Administration (probate law)LawRedressHistoryPolitical sciencePulpitSociologyGender studiesPoliticsArt historyArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

One evening in June 1938, the Wichita evangelist Gerald Burton Winrod made a campaign speech before an audience of approximately 450 people in Fremont Park in the city of Emporia, Kansas, as part of his bid to become the Republican nominee for the Senate. Although “Onward Christian Soldiers” blasted from a sound truck before he began, his address focused on the failures of the Franklin D. Roosevelt administration to redress the economic devastation of the Great Depression. The crowd was enthusiastic: “I'm a Democrat, but I want to vote for you in November,” one listener told him afterward. Asked what he thought the chances were for a Republican to unseat the incumbent Democratic senator George McGill in 1938, Winrod replied, “I see a rising tide of reaction against the New Deal in Kansas. It is evident everywhere I go. Although this is an off-election year, it is going to be...

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.231
Threshold uncertainty score0.460

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0490.024
Scholarly communication0.0120.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.009
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.261 · 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 venueJournal of American HistorySame topicAmerican Constitutional Law and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207