MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4396902699 · doi:10.1017/9781805434160.009

The Western Hemisphere May 1917 to January 1919

2024· other· en· W4396902699 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typeother
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicKorean Peninsula Historical and Political Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWestern hemisphereNorthern HemisphereClimatologyHistoryGeographyGeologyEconomic geography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION The British naval presence in the Western Hemisphere in 1917 was almost minimal. British strength had been run down following the general rapprochement with the United States between 1895 and 1903 and as a result of Admiral Fisher’s policy of concentrating the Royal Navy’s strength in the North Sea. Further slimming had taken place under the pressure of war and the C-in-C North America and West Indies, Vice-Admiral Browning, was left with a handful of superannuated cruisers and armed merchant cruisers. The South American squadron was similarly stretched and diluted. Attempts had been made, with little success, to persuade the Canadian Government to raise substantial naval forces for general imperial defence and Browning doubled as Naval Advisor to Ottawa. Despite this token presence, the British nevertheless sought to control all neutral and Allied shipping sailing from eastern seaboard and Caribbean ports, British naval officers installed in these ports acting as routing, and later as convoy, controllers. When the United States entered the war, the Navy Department was naturally desirous of controlling all shipping emanating from US ports and made approaches of this kind to the Admiralty at intervals. All were resisted by the Admiralty, supported by Sims, on the grounds that the British organisation was complete, experienced, efficient and effectively co-ordinated with that of the Admiralty itself [334, 335, 338, 413]. The Americans did not help their cause by resisting the introduction of convoy, thereby compelling the British to establish their own organisation (based on existing routing offices) in North American ports [338]. More palatable to the Admiralty was the American request for a British convoy officer to be attached to the Navy Department; with this, the Admiralty happily conformed [349–50, 353–4]. Most of the early contact between the British, French and American navies was entirely without friction and devoted initially to the solution of the surface raider problem (though unknown to the coalition, this was a declining problem as Germany channelled its resources increasingly into the U-boat campaign). Local commanders came to amicable agreements and friendly working arrangements on patrols and zones of responsibility, as well as the control of shipping should U-boats appear in these waters [336,337], 345–6, 348, 355, 361]. The extent of the U-boat threat in the Western Hemisphere was for some months a matter of dispute between Benson and the Admiralty and Sims.

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 score0.212
Threshold uncertainty score0.711

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0030.000
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.2120.050

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.300 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicKorean Peninsula Historical and Political StudiesFrench-language works237,207