MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4365445267 · doi:10.1017/9781108767712.005

“Gott mit uns”

2023· book-chapter· de· W4365445267 on OpenAlexaff
Doris L. Bergen

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2023
Typebook-chapter
Languagede
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, Christianity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBattleGermanJudaismAncient historyHistoryPolitical scienceLawArtArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Chapter 3 discusses the war from the attack on Poland in 1939 to the invasion of Norway, the Low Countries, and France in 1940, and Yugoslavia and Greece in 1941. Chaplains accompanied Wehrmacht units wherever they went, and this period of Blitzkrieg, rapid German victories, proved formative for them. Germany’s conquests opened up new territory for chaplains, who seized the opportunities to assert their loyalty and prove their worth. They gained an enormous audience of soldiers and also ministered to Christian populations in conquered and occupied territories. Chaplains witnessed and got used to German attacks on civilians, such as terror bombings in the Netherlands, shooting of prisoners in Norway, and rampant abuse of Jews and destruction of Jewish sites in Poland. This chapter makes extensive use of chaplains’ periodic reports, submitted up the chain of command. A surprising number of reports refer to chaplains ministering to German soldiers condemned to death by military authorities. The Wehrmacht chaplains projected an image as heroic, battle-hardened men who strengthened the resolve of the troops and built bridges to the homefront, for instance by providing Christian burials.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.077
Threshold uncertainty score0.257

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.003
Scholarly communication0.0030.004
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0770.027

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicReligion, Theology, History, Judaism, ChristianityFrench-language works237,207