MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925217567 · doi:10.17185/duepublico/83749

Jüdische Immigranten in der belgischen Ökonomie: Teil 3: Zwischen „Arisierung“ und Deportation (1942–1944)

2025· article· en· W6925217567 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpen MIND · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean history and politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDeportationThe HolocaustJudaismGermanAdministration (probate law)ImmigrationQuarter (Canadian coin)Population

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay is the third and final part of a series of contributions on the economic situation of Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe who had settled in Belgium during the inter-war period as craftsmen, salespersons or small business owners (see SGO #22 and #23, both published in 2018, for part I and II). The research is based on the extensive files of the ‘Gruppe XII’ of the German military administration in Brussels which was responsible for the so-called ‘Judenvermögen’ (‘Jewish assets’). In the spring of 1942 the German occupation authorities in Belgium started the so-called ‘Aryanisation’ by liquidating the vast majority of small Jewish businesses. This affected about a quarter of the Jewish population in Belgium. Shortly thereafter deportations of Jews from Belgium to Auschwitz began. Today we know that the annihilation of Jewish businesses marked the beginning of the Shoah in Belgium. Quotations from a wide array of begging letters to the military administration show the reactions of the Jewish owners to the destruction of their livelihoods, which alternative forms of income they had and which alternative strategies they employed to save themselves and the lives of their families. The epilogue compiles a series of illustrative testimonies of Holocaust survivors from among the Jewish business owners.

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)0.001
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: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.251
Threshold uncertainty score0.499

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.003
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.047
GPT teacher head0.381
Teacher spread0.334 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpen MINDSame topicEuropean history and politicsFrench-language works237,207