Bibliographic record
Abstract
War posters constitute an enormous cache of primary documentation that has been largely unresearched. Their significance in portraying the cultural impact of the war has perhaps been consequently overlooked. This dissertation is, primarily, an analysis of the content, imagery and evolution of a broad selection of Great War posters from England, Canada, the United States, France and Germany. Of particular concern are those characteristics that are integral to the understanding of a new cultural mode here defined as modernism. By tracing the expression of these characteristics and the frequency of their recurrences within the poster record, the present study develops a general assessment of the conflict between elements of traditional and modernist popular culture. The protracted and unprecedented conflict of the Great War led to manifest societal change. Many of the dominant and widely-held popular conceptions of soldiering, warfare, gender roles, religion, patriotism and violence were irrevocably altered. Various poster artists and graphic designers incorporated their changed views of these issues in their depictions. The later works of the artists and designers constituted visual broadsides which indicated the ascendancy of a darkly negative strain of modernism, over traditional, Edwardian representations. Through the examination of western Great War posters housed in various archives, this study delineates some of the forces, processes and examples of a fundamental shift in twentieth-century cultural attitudes.
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.136 | 0.030 |
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".