MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4392585879 · doi:10.1080/09592296.2024.2303854

Halban’s ‘Diplomatic Flu’: A Case Study in Nuclear Diplomacy in World War II

2024· article· en· W4392585879 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Richard J.E. Brown

Bibliographic record

VenueDiplomacy and Statecraft · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicNuclear Issues and Defense
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiplomacyPolitical scienceNuclear weaponLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article recounts an incident in Anglo-American nuclear diplomacy during the Second World War, in which Hans Halban – a French physicist researching nuclear fission on behalf of the British government at a joint Anglo-Canadian research facility in Montreal – was forbidden to participate in technical discussions with his American counterparts. This previously neglected incident usefully highlights the complex and contested nature of Anglo-American nuclear diplomacy during the Second World War. In February 1943 Halban had been invited to participate in a discussion concerning his work on heavy water, a topic with immense potential significance to the American nuclear programme. The invite came at a low point in Anglo-American nuclear relations. Interchange between the two states had effectively ceased. Fearing that allowing the trip might weaken the British negotiating position, Halban’s superiors sought to forbid the discussion, and at first instructed Halban to fake an illness to excuse his non-attendance. This ruse was eventually abandoned, but the trip was nevertheless cancelled. The article provides a granular contextualised account of these events and the British rationale throughout. Focussing on the perspectives of scientists and administrators in this period directs attention away from the interpersonal diplomacy of Churchill and Roosevelt towards a more nuanced understanding of the drivers of wartime nuclear diplomacy. The inter-connection of the various tiers of relationships within the allied nuclear programmes is emphasised and the importance of technical considerations in the overall construction of allied nuclear policy demonstrated. Canada’s significance in wartime nuclear diplomacy is also highlighted.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.204

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0430.022
Scholarly communication0.0100.006
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0090.011
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.347
Teacher spread0.323 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiplomacy and StatecraftSame topicNuclear Issues and DefenseFrench-language works237,207