MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285608128 · doi:10.1017/9781800105515.002

Introduction: Keith Neilson and Modern International History

2022· other· en· W4285608128 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T.G. Otte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicHistorical and Contemporary Political Dynamics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Having ‘a poor sort of memory’ is not the problem for historians. Indeed, the problem is rather the reverse. Like the White Queen’s, historians’ memories work in two directions; they know in advance how the events they study turn out. Thus, they find themselves drawn to the conclusion that what did happen was inevitable. But such foreknowledge was denied to those who participated in the events themselves. Keith Neilson The work of a historian is never done. The very nature of history ensures that this is so. Past events are not frozen in time. Evidence pertaining to them is never complete, hardly ever incontrovertible, and so capable of often sharply contrasting interpretations. Rooted in the present, the historian watches the object of his studies recede, steadily and ineluctably. All he can do is to dig further, probe more widely and ask different, yet more searching questions to retrieve a little more of the past, its complex and changing contexts, always knowing that, ultimately, it will elude his grasp. When discussing such matters, Keith Neilson was fond of quoting Günter Grass, the German novelist, who in his memoir of his own uncertain past likened interrogating it to peeling an onion. He argued ‘that “when pestered with questions, memory is like an onion that wishes to be peeled so we can read what is laid bare letter by letter. It is seldom unambiguous and often in mirror-writing or otherwise disguised.”’ Keith thought ‘that we should take this advice to heart and continue to peel the onion’. Sometimes, however, the work is left undone because, more prosaically and yet more cruelly, the life of the historian is cut short just at the moment when his latest work nears completion. This is also the case with The Foreign Office's War, 1939–41 , which Keith left behind, when he died in April 2015, shortly after retiring as Professor of History at the Royal Military College of Canada ( Collège militaire royal du Canada ) (RMC). He had devoted much of his life to the study of great power politics, and more especially the British Foreign Office and the service departments in Whitehall, the mores and mentalities of diplomats, officials and their political masters with particular reference to their dealings with Russia, both in her Tsarist and her Soviet guises. Historians bring to their work a distinct perspective, reflecting their own background and upbringing and conditioned by their generational experiences.

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)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.026
Threshold uncertainty score0.086

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.006
Scholarly communication0.0050.008
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0260.005

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.178
Teacher spread0.158 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicHistorical and Contemporary Political DynamicsFrench-language works237,207