MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7095405720

Toronto, Ontario, where he wrote this Extended Essay for Mr. McKell during the 2002/2003 academic year. AUSTRIA-HUNGARY AND THE COMPROMISE OF 1867

2015· article· en· W7095405720 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicComparative and World Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCompromiseRulerBourgeoisiePower (physics)NationalismVariety (cybernetics)
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A variety of cultures and races lived under the rule of the Habsburgs from their rise to power in 1278 to the empire’s eventual dissolution in 1918.1 For some time since 1848, the Austro-Hungarian empire had been weakening. As a result of internal nationalist fervor it was also facing the prospect of a revolt, one as wide-ranging as the Springtime of the Peoples.2 Nationalists such as Camillo di Cavour and Otto von Bismarck3 were liberating the Austrian-occupied lands of Italy and Prussia. The threat of empire-wide dissolution was quickly becoming a reality for the Habsburg ruler of Austria, Franz Joseph.4 Having no military method with which to suppress the kingdom’s internal Hungarian nationalism, Franz Joseph signed a compromise in 1867 with the Magyars,5 a group of upper middle class bourgeoisie living in Hungary, to pacify their growing dissat-isfaction with the status quo. The industrial revolution had enabled

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.533
Threshold uncertainty score0.940

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.002
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0800.019

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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.259
Teacher spread0.220 · 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
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicComparative and World LiteratureFrench-language works237,207