Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Junior Red Cross movement started in the USA and Canada during the First World War to assist relief work of the Red Cross and very soon became international and rapidly spread throughout the world. In Japan, the Junior Red Cross was established in 1922 and become popular very quickly. Its major goals were promotion of health, work for community and international cultural exchanges curried through international school correspondence. lnternational school correspondence become especially appealing for the children throughout the world as a unique opportunity to communicate with children in far-away lands and learn more about history, geography and culture of different countries. As the exchanges could had been conducted between all the countries that established the Junior Red Cross (in the 1930s the number grown to 39 countries) the range of possible exchanges was remarkably extensive. This paper discusses the development of international school correspondence conducted by the Japanese Junior Red Cross in the 1920s and the 1930s, specifically the dynamic and the range of exchanges, the countries that became important exchange partners for Japan, and the significance of the exchanges. As the primary research references we used the journals and official publications issued by the Japanese Junior Red and the Japanese Red Cross and as the additional references - the journals issued by the American Junior Red Cross. During the rapid growth of the popularity of the Junior Red Cross in 1920s-30s' Japan, the Japanese children had been exchanging different items such as albums and scrapbooks, toys, dolls in national costumes and handicrafts to introduce Japanese culture mostly with Eastern and Western European and North American countries, namely the USA, Canada, Poland, Italy, France and Czechoslovakia. The exchanges between the USA and Japan proved to be the most numerous and frequent for the both countries.
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 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.014 | 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".