Bibliographic record
Abstract
Kevin McCranie, currently a professor of Comparative Strategy at the US Naval War College in Newport, Rhode Island, has written a fine account of the two predominant naval strategists that, in effect, created the field that before them was largely unwritten, if not unconsidered.The two individuals, one American and one British, are Alfred Mahan and Julian Corbett.Both articulated an approach to naval strategy that had much in common, yet involved important differences that reflected the motivations of the two thinkers in undertaking the work that they did, as well as the differences in the place of the navies in each country at the time.The importance of the pair is that no one has risen to take their place in the forefront of maritime strategic affairs, signifying the originality of their work and its seminal nature.McCrainie has provided real service in bringing the two thinkers together in a convenient package and has well assessed their work, noting their similarities and differences, as well as their ongoing importance.Mahan started with the publication of his well known work The Influence of Sea Power upon History 1660-1783, first published in 1890 and never out of print since.At the date of publication, Mahan's naval career was winding down and, it must be said, he was not overly successful in the business of going to sea and exercising command.He was, however, a fine lecturer at the newly opened US Naval War College, a post he earned as a result of this book.From there he set about writing prolifically on naval affairs, some historical, such as his first, and others more polemical in seeking to push US naval policy in a more aggressive direction.Indeed, at the time of writing the US Navy was relatively small and not much regarded in terms of national or international affairs.This Mahan sought to change and push the US in developing naval power reflective of its economic might and increasingly global interests.Mahan was a naval propagandist, with an agenda.Corbett had an entirely different background.He was well educated, with private fortune, and thereby able to indulge his interests in history without the support of an academic institution or formal position in any entity that might underwrite his work.He started life as a barrister, but was not an enthusiastic practitioner in that field.He joined the Naval Records Society in the early 1890s, that led to his preparing a volume on the Spanish War of 1585-87.He then wrote a book on the Tudor navy based on archival research that matched anything done in academia at the time.This book, Drake and the Tudor Navy, was published in 1898, with a follow-on effort, The Successors of Drake, in
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 | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".