Bibliographic record
Abstract
This volume grew out of a chance encounter between two of the editors, Melanie and Neville, at a conference in Singapore in early 2014.After recovering from the surprise at discovering a shared intellectual interest in the history of the Red Cross, conversation quickly turned to bemoaning the dearth of scholarship on the subject and, in time, to the possibility of gathering like-minded scholars together to discuss the matter further.Thoughts slowly crystallised over the next few years, and after James Crossland and Christine Winter joined the enterprise, and support was secured from the Australian Red Cross, the Canadian Network on Humanitarian History (www.aidhistory.ca), Flinders University and the University of Nottingham, a conference was duly convened in Adelaide, South Australia, in September 2016.The event brought together over fifty historians, archivists and practitioners, and explored some of the continuities and changes that have defined the Red Cross Movement since its inception in the 1860s.Many of the ideas and papers first discussed at the conference have found their way into this volume, though the project has also drawn in scholars who were either unable to make the journey 'down under' or whose interest in the subject was piqued by the debates sparked by our discussions in Adelaide.The editors are delighted to thank Ali Lehman, for overseeing the conference administration; Michael Barnett, who delivered its first keynote address; and Judy Slayter, who addressed the conference in her capacity as CEO of the Australian Red Cross.We are, of course, especially grateful to our contributing authors, who have responded to our editorial requests,
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".