Striking a Balance Between Dissent and Discipline: Admiral Sir Reginald Drax
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'amiral Sir Reginald A. R. Plunkett-Ernle-Erle-Drax a été un des officiers les plus doués de la British Royal Navy au cours de la première moitié du 20e siècle, et un des premiers officiers d'état-major qualifié de la Navy.L'amiral Drax a oeuvré pour que le personnel au niveau du travail soit reconnu par le service et a été un des membres fondateurs de la Naval Review.Il a pleinement participé aux réformes de la révolution de la Navy mais a réalisé que la passion pour la réforme doit être équilibré d'une acuité politique.Contrairement aux autres, il a travaillé avec diligence pour encourager les changements professionnels dans le cadre de l'organisme.Instead of the brain being an active and productive machine, a thing of vast constructive power, we try to make it a cross between a museum and a lostproperty office.-Commander R. Plunket, 1913' Military organisations have a deserved reputation for resisting change, and the Royal Navy has been one of the principal offenders, or so we have been told by disgruntled officers such as Admirals Herbert Richmond, Kenneth Dewar and Percy Scott. 2 The experiences of these men have coloured the historiography to such an extent that other officers advocating reform less stridently are largely forgotten.Although these men have not left volumes of memoirs, masses of private papers or newspapers commentaries, their work was vital.Not only did many gain their "brass hats" as senior executive officers but often reached flag rank and served in important posts ashore and afloat.3 1 Drax, "Naval Education," Naval Review, I (1913), 28.2 Arthur Marder, From the Dardanelles to Oran (London, 1974), 33.3 Ironically, many of the would-be reformers, including the three mentioned above, made it to flag rank, even if they did not receive the appointments for which they had hoped.
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 | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| 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 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.014 |
| 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".