Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The classic vision that speaks of a very clear initial prevalence of neutralism within the ranks of Italian Catholicism appears to be fairly well founded. It should however be considered, and this essay endeavours to investigate precisely this evolution, how interventionism took root in that world through different channels and with different cultural and intellectual lenses. On the one hand, the conservatism of some circles that were close to the government and to the Salandra’s liberal party was an important factor (although not all Catholic conservatives were initially interventionists). These positions were partly already in tune with the nationalist group’s way of reasoning, in a spiritualist, anti-Giolitti and anti-materialist key. On the other hand, a series of groups close to official Catholicism inclined, in a substantially passive and unprepared way, towards an interventionist position that simply adjusted itself to the government’s options (the so-called ‘conditioned’ neutrality, linked to homeland interests, in the line of a certain Guelph-rooted patriotism). Finally, small groups of Christian democratic matrix adopted instead democratic interventionist schemes, interpreting the war as an occasion for waging a battle against the reactionary conservatism of the Central Empires and for achieving national demands, in their illusory hope of a spontaneous convergence of movements on a European scale. Starting from these different ways of cultural reasoning, many sectors of Italian Catholicism found themselves close to rather similar interventionist instances, shared finally in about May 1915.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 it