MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4285608140 · doi:10.1017/9781800105515.001

Preface and Acknowledgments

2022· other· en· W4285608140 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
T.G. Otte

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldPharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutics
TopicPharmacy and Medical Practices
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The 1930s and the period of the Second World War are never out of fashion amongst historians. A continuous stream of publications – be they learned monographs, scholarly articles or popular histories – testifies to that fact. For Britain, this period continues to play a significant, if not indeed determinant, role in how the country sees itself and its relations with the rest of its continent. This view is all too often tinged with the sepia tones of nostalgia and coloured by exaggerated assumptions of Britain's power. The waxing and waning of British influence in the world, and the nature of the elements of power that underpinned the nation's international position and the nature of their interaction, have been the subject of enduring fascination for historians. They lie also at the core of the work of Keith Neilson (1948–2015). A native of Alberta in Western Canada, and from his vantage point at the Royal Military College of Canada in Kingston, Ontario, he brought an ‘imperial’ and global perspective to studies of Britain's external relations in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. His work did not neglect the fundamentally European setting of British policy, however. On the contrary, it is remarkable for its finely balanced appreciation of the global nature of British policy, encompassing both its European and the overseas dimensions. Whilst appreciating the cultural or ideological aspects of the subject – entirely befitting for someone of his fine literary sensibilities – Keith nevertheless placed questions of political and material power at the heart of his studies. These matters are also at the heart of The Foreign Office's War, 1939–41: British Strategic Foreign Policy and the Major Neutral Powers . It offers a finely drawn, yet robustly argued and meticulously evidenced, portrait of a department that was central to the framing and executing of foreign policy but that struggled to (re)gain some degree of control over fast-moving events. As with Keith's earlier works, it is its author's good historical an antennae, highly sensitive to subtle and profound shifts of opinion and power, that distinguishes this book. The Foreign Office's War follows on, but in significant ways transcends, his 2006 monograph on interwar Anglo-Soviet relations. In narrow chronological terms, it continues the account of great power relations from early 1939 to the German invasion of the Soviet Union in June 1941.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.618
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.6190.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.182
GPT teacher head0.514
Teacher spread0.331 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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 topicPharmacy and Medical PracticesFrench-language works237,207