Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this paper is to reveal the situation about the reunion of the Japan P.E.N. Club in February 1947. The way to research it is to check primary source material about it out and make a comparative review of it and the official history of the current Japan P.E.N. Club. However, we can’t see the original documents of it in Japan, there are a lot of the letters, the papers and the carbon copies from the Club at that time in USA, Canada, UK and other countries. The main archives I have visited and utilized are the Harry Ransom Center at the University of Texas at Austin and the Thomas Fisher Rare Book Library at the University of Toronto Libraries. The results of this research are below. Firstly, being contrary to common belief, the Japan P.E.N. Club was re-established in February 1947 not by Japanese writers but by Mark Gayn as a journalist from USA and GHQ. Secondly, according to several primary documents, SHIGA Naoya as the third president of this Club was totally absent from this organization. The conclusion of this paper is that it is better for us to recognize the reunion of the Japan P.E.N. Club in 1947 as part of the policy by GHQ.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.003 |
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".