Violences de guerre et transmission de la mémoire des conflits à travers l'exemple de la campagne de Calabre de 1806-1807
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Nicolas Cadet, The Violence of War and the transmission of the Memory of Conflicts: the example of the Calabrian Campaign, 1806-1807. The invasion of the Kingdom of Naples by the Napoleonic army in 1806 provoked a major popular insurrection in the southern most provinces of the peninsula, notably in Calabria. For almost one year, the troops entrusted with repressing the uprising exhausted themselves chassing the elusive rebels who always manage to escape, and who with the aid of the British practiced a skillful strategy of harassment. For the French soldiers, the atmosphere of extreme violence in which the compaign developed added to its generally difficult and frustrating nature. Evolving in a universe imbued with religiosity, the Calabrians led a veritable crusade against the occupiers: the violence and multilations they inflicted on whose who fell into their hands elicited in return ferocious reprisals. A war of extreme violence, the Calabrian campaign emphasized the close ties uniting memory and modes of representation. The Calabrian insurrection of 1806 -1807 has for different reasons fallen into oblivion in France, Italy, and Great Britain; its memory is practically absent in the official memory as well as in the popular memory.
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".