Sarah Ann Frank. <i>Hostages of Empire: Colonial Prisoners of War in Vichy France</i>.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
French colonial troops in the two world wars have been the subject of increased interest over the last twenty-five years. A late twentieth-century wave of scholarship, led by Myron Echenberg and Joe Lunn, delved into the conditions of their recruitment, the discriminations they faced, and the ways in which they were used in battle, most notably. Given its path-breaking nature, that first wave of scholarship was also logically marked by a degree of compartmentalization, with few studies examining the collective use of Malagasy, West African, North African, and Indochinese troops within a single framework. Similarly, by and large, captivity was not yet at the heart of these studies. More recent histories, including Gregory Mann’s innovative Native Sons, tended instead to locate soldiers in their communities of origin and consider the role and status of veterans. The lack of specific attention to colonial POWs in World War II began to be addressed with works by Martin Thomas and Raffael Scheck in English (and of other historians in French). Sarah Ann Frank’s impressive first book contributes an expansive and insightful pan-imperial analysis of French colonial troops captured during the battle of France in May and June 1940.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.020 | 0.005 |
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".