Preface to the 2004 Edition
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More than twenty years ago, in 1981, Canadians Behind Enemy Lines was published.Two years later, it was reprinted.Since then, it has been out of print.Demand, however, has continued.A French translation, Deniere les lignes ennemies (Montreal), was published in 2002.Now UBC Press has reissued the original English version, unrevised.I am unaware of any gross errors that would have warranted a revision, and only a few small textual corrections have been made.When this book was first published, interest in the clandestine warfare of the Second World War was everywhere evident -in films, plays, novels, and histories.Since then, that interest has grown, and books written on the subject would now fill a small library.Why such a sustained interest?Perhaps a major reason is an atavistic admiration of personal courage, especially when it is set against the backdrop of modern warfare.Fundamentally, courage is an individual quality, even when expressed in collectivities such as an air crew, commando, or other small units.In centuries past, combat was of course hand-to-hand.But the Second World War was a conflict on a grand scale, where large forces were mechanized to such a degree that bombers, submarines, and even mobile infantry rarely, if at all, saw the face of the enemy.In this type of impersonal warfare -where atomic devastation became the ultimate act of impersonality -extraordinary personal courage was more readily apparent in the activities
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 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.587 | 0.431 |
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; the direct Gemma label and the distilled Codex classifier agree on what is shown here.
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".