David Hepper, British Warship Losses in the Modern Era 1920–1982 by Greg Swinden
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Reviews 415Mediterranean.The omnipresent threat of danger drives most of the narrative and the main body of the text.This is an easily accessible volume for someone unfamiliar with Operation Pedestal, or the larger war in the Mediterranean, who is interested in an historical account without being overburdened by technical details.While discussing the tactics used to attack and defend the convoys, Hastings keeps things general enough that casual readers will not get bogged down in strategic issues, while providing enough detail to keep students interested in such things involved in the narrative.The text allows readers to follow the flow of the events without explaining how submarines, aircraft, and torpedoes actually work.While those familiar with the action surrounding Operation Pedestal might not find anything revolutionary here, Hastings' research will still enhance their understanding of the events and challenges faced by the Malta convoys.For casual readers wanting an entry into the subject, the book has a lot to offer.Students looking for a more in-depth academic discussion, however, may find the work somewhat lacking.Fortunately, Hastings provides an extensive bibliography for further exploration -unfortunately, none of the endnotes are referenced within the main body of the text.This makes correlating a specific endnote to a reference in the book extremely difficult.If by design, it takes away from the usefulness of this work for academics; if in error, it should be corrected through careful editing of future editions.While not shedding new light on Operation Pedestal itself, this book opens an accessible, well-researched porthole onto a dramatic and important series of events that students of naval and military history might not have previously considered exploring.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 0.006 |
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".