Conflicting Loyalties Among Soldiers Fighting Both in the German Army and the Allied Forces
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflicting Loyalties Among Soldiers Fighting Both in the German Army and the Allied ForcesWhen Allied soldier Wacław fought in the battle of Falaise in 1944, his section hit a German tank.The battle was especially bloody for Wacław's unit, the 1 st Polish Armoured Division fighting under Canadian command.Allied forces surrounded the Wehrmacht "like it was a bottle", as British Army Officer Bernard Montgomery would later say, 1 and the division was the cork through which the German army wanted to escape.The victory cleared the path to Paris, and is considered the division's greatest success. 2 Sixty-six years after he had taken part in the action, Wacław articulated his experience:On the hill at Falaise I was right there just when the attack happened.It went off like this: cannon, tank, cannon, tank.Artillery firing, suddenly one tank gets hit, the crew jumps out, one guy runs straight for me, straight at our cannon.I look up and this is my brother-in-law.(laughs) Listen, such things only ever happen in the movies! 3 Wacław had attacked his brother-in-law, and his account blurs our understanding of war.We are used to thinking that two clearly defined sides encounter each other on a battlefield.The logic of warfare is based on the legitimisation of all actions against a defined opponent.4 This requires soldiers to be faithful to their commitments and the orders of their superiors.Soldiers like Wacław knew, or could guess, that there were family members and friends battling on the other side.Their descriptions of existential chaos and a struggle for survival are characterised by a lack of the usual orientation framework that war discourse offers: the loyal fight against a clearly defined opponent.This article offers a collective narrative portrait of the soldiers who fought on both sides of the Western Front.Over the course of the war, the possibility of non-Jews being included into the German Volk increased.In East Upper Silesia, a Bernard Law Montgomery of Alamein, Inwazja na Europę (Warszawa: Pantheon, 1948), 48-49.
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 | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
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".