MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4213278753 · doi:10.25071/2561-5467.257

Commonwealth Navies as Seen by the United States Navy, 1910-2010

2014· article· en· W4213278753 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
John B. Hattendorf

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Northern Mariner / Le marin du nord · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and Federalism
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommonwealthPolitical scienceHumanitiesNavyArtLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Aux États-Unis, les perspectives sur les marines du Commonwealth au cours du siècle passé ont varié, car les Américains ont considéré la question en termes de contextes différents.Au départ, certains officiers clairvoyants de la Marine américaine, tels A.T. Mahan et W.S. Sims, ont vu le potentiel de d'entente et de coopération entre les marines « anglosaxonnes ».Pendant la même période, les forces navales du Commonwealth ont joué un rôle dans la planification de guerre navale américaine.Avant les années 1930, beaucoup de ces plans ont été vus comme des tests de capacité de la Marine américaine contre une puissance à peu près égale et, donc, sur le plan académique ont illustré le rôle de la puissance navale, mais néanmoins ont révélé des vues intéressantes sur les marines du Commonwealth.Avec l'avènement de la seconde guerre mondiale, les relations navales ont changé de façon spectaculaire, en tant que la Marine américaine a travaillé en étroite collaboration avec les forces britanniques et du Commonwealth pour combattre l'ennemi commun.Cela a continué jusqu'à la période de la guerre froide avec des alliances de défense avec l'OTAN et autres.Cette entente persiste avec l'actuelle « stratégie maritime coopérative pour le 21e siècle » des États-Unis.In 1977, Professor Robin Winks of Yale University famously observed that, "Americans cannot understand their own history without understanding Canadian history.Conversely, Canadians cannot understand their history without understanding American history." 2 At the same time, Winks went on to point out the additional value to be found in comparing and contrasting the histories of Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and the United States as they separately grew within the shared heritage of the English-speaking peoples, developing their own particular national identities as they merged with other 1 The opinions and judgments in this paper are the personal academic views of the author on historical issues and do not reflect any current policy or official view of the United States of America, the United States Navy, the Naval War College, or any other agency.2

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 score0.725
Threshold uncertainty score0.554

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.005
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.280
Teacher spread0.258 · 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Northern Mariner / Le marin du nordSame topicCommonwealth, Australian Politics and FederalismFrench-language works237,207