MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W6992377838

Les marranes du xxe siècle

2012· article· fr· W6992377838 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueOpenEdition (OpenEdition) · 2012
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOnline and Blended Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIndignationThe HolocaustNova scotiaNazism
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Following the June 1967 War in the Middle East, the Polish communist regime launched an anti-Zionists campaign targeting the country’s Jews. In accordance with the Soviet position on the war, the Polish government severed relation with Israel and attacked Poland’s Jews, accusing them of supporting Israel against the official stance. The campaign intensified after student demonstrations in March 1968. As a result, thousands of Jews immigrated to Israel. This paper tells the story of the Israeli view on the anti-Zionist campaign and the new Polish-Jewish immigrants, or Olim, the Hebrew term. Relying on the Israeli press, the paper aims to reconstruct how mainstream Israel saw Polish Jewish relations and conceived of Polish Jews outraged the Israelis. It shows that Polish Jews, recently expelled from the country they considered home, received little sympathy in Israeli newspapers. The Hebrew press presented them as wayward sons of Israel, as men and women who had chosen the wrong path and betrayed their people. According to this narrative, Polish Jews should have foreseen that antisemitism would raise its head again in Poland. In some ways, the Israeli discourse mirrored the Polish one – in both cases Jews could not escape their natural-born identity and had only one homeland, the state of Israel.

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)0.000
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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.108

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0040.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0320.006

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueOpenEdition (OpenEdition)→Same topicOnline and Blended Learning→French-language works237,207→