Saint or harlot?, France in the American press, 1918-1924
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Following the 1918 armistice, the world settled into a precarious peace. France sought security from future German aggression, while the United States sought the repayment of war debts and European economic stability. Suspicions, hard feelings, and misunderstandings aggravated already war-weary nations, resulting in innumerable misconceptions. Many books have been written regarding the political and social climates of the period between 1918 and 1924. However, the relationship between these countries on a popular level has largely been ignored. To address this historical gap, this thesis examines the images of France that appeared in American newspapers from the end of World War One to the 1924 Dawes Plan, focussing on perceptions of French society, culture, and politics. The popular American opinions at the time reflect much ambiguity--France was both saint and harlot, loved and hated, inviting and repulsive. This ambiguity was reflected in American foreign policy, which was neither strict nor lax with theFrench government. The link between the press, public opinion, and foreign policy is tenuous at best, and is discussed in the conclusion.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.022 | 0.002 |
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".