MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6925920071 · doi:10.21427/yzym-f637

Pickelfleisch, Pastirma, and Beyond: An Overview of the Myths of the Origin of Pastrami

2025· article· en· W6925920071 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueArrow - TU Dublin (Technological University Dublin) · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicActinomycetales infections and treatment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEtymologyGermanMythologyExpansiveAssertionState (computer science)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper investigates the assertion by Claudia Roden that pastrami is an invention of New York City delicatessens, a claim that refutes the accepted etymology of the word “pastrami” as being linked to a seasoned air-dried meat, sometimes referred to as basturma/pastirma, from Romania or Turkey. The probability that the roots of this iconic American delicatessen favourite can originally be found in two similar meats, pickelfleisch and homen, both originating from the areas today known as Alsace, France and the southeastern section of the German state of Rhineland-Palatinate will also be explored. Ashkenazi food culture is predominantly identified as having originated in a wide swathe of territory, encompassing Northern, Central and Eastern Europe but regularly overlooks the fact that the Jews across this expansive area had migrated from the Ashkenaz Valley in the thirteenth century. They brought their food traditions with them, including the methods of preparing these meats. Many other styles of meat preservation existed or subsequently emerged, but pastrami is distinct in that the meat (beef) is brined, cured, smoked and then steamed. These methods were used in Alsace/Rhineland before being transported to Central and Eastern Europe and then onward to the United States and Canada, where the now famous delicatessen version of pastrami was essentially born.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.733
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.030
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 teacher head, 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 venueArrow - TU Dublin (Technological University Dublin)Same topicActinomycetales infections and treatmentFrench-language works237,207