Bibliographic record
Abstract
Note: I wrote this chapter in the summer of 1941 while on leave in Canada. Now that we are at war with Japan, it is out of date but I leave it as my own impression of the conditions that led up to the war. It is true that the first blow was struck against the US and that we ourselves then declared war but until it became clear that the US and Great Britain were going to stand shoulder-to-shoulder in opposing Japan, it was the latter that Japan regarded as the main stumbling-block in the path of her progress. HAVING SERVED THE whole of my official life in Japan or in territories under her dominion or control, I may be forgiven for holding very definite opinions on the subject of Anglo-Japanese relations and the manner in which we have handled them in recent years. The views I have formed are not, I believe, generally held and since I am not so conceited as to think everyone is blind except myself, I put them forward with some diffidence as a contribution, shall we say, to a study of the problem. I begin with certain quotations from Sir Austen Chamberlain: It seems that we are becoming the scold of Europe. We run about shaking our fists in people's faces, screaming that this must be altered and that that must stop. We get ourselves disliked and distrusted and misunderstood, and in the end we achieve nothing and relapse into humiliated silence or laboriously explain how pleased we are. Curzon is convinced that all is well if he delivers an oration or pens a ‘superior’ despatch. Do not repeat in this matter the mistake of the Curzon despatch – a great opening, a pause and then nothing. (Extracts from letters written by Austen to Neville Chamberlain in September and October 1923, quoted in The Life and Letters of the Rt Hon Sir Austen Chamberlain by Petrie, pp. 227 and 229). We decide the practical questions of daily life by instinct rather than by any careful process of reasoning, by rule of thumb rather than by systematic logic.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.049 | 0.009 |
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".