MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

The Peacemaker Woodrow Wilson and the Hungarian Soviet Republic

2022· article· en· W4310493843 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Peter Pastor

Bibliographic record

VenueHungarian Studies Review · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicFrench Historical and Cultural Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPeace treatyPolitical scienceNationalismIdeologyIntervention (counseling)LawResistance (ecology)Government (linguistics)The RepublicAggressionEconomic historyTreatyPolitical economyAncient historyPoliticsHistorySociologyPhilosophyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The rise of the Hungarian Soviet Republic shocked the peacemakers at the 1919 Paris Peace Conference, as it signaled the spread of Bolshevism from Soviet Russia to the West. They feared that the dreaded ideology could inspire a revolution in Germany. For this reason, some of the peace conferees favored military intervention and the overthrow of the Hungarian government. President Wilson, the most influential leader in Paris, was against intervention and called for caution. He was concerned that the US forces would get into a never-ending quagmire in Hungary. Drawing lessons from the Thermidorian turn of revolutions, he counted on the eventual collapse of the radical Bolshevik experiment in Hungary. For this reason, he also objected to the aggressive acts of the so-called small allies, Romania and Czecho-Slovakia, on Hungarian soil. He blamed them for the rise and survival of the Soviet regime, as their aggression generated nationalist resistance in Hungary. Wilson’s eventual solution to the Hungarian problem was the speedy completion of the peace treaty. For its sake he abandoned his much-touted principle of self-determination and was willing to disregard any part of his Fourteen Points.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.339
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0090.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.064
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.187 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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 venueHungarian Studies ReviewSame topicFrench Historical and Cultural StudiesFrench-language works237,207