Une histoire transnationale de la grande famine en Chine : la circulation d'information et la réception des réfugiés de la famine à Hong Kong et Macao, 1958-1962
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Refugee and Famine, while the two terms have been rarely juxtaposed in terms of existing studies on the Great Leap Famine, the thesis investigates this underexplored aspect based or untapped archives collected from Europe, China and the US. It examines the reception of famine refugees by missionaries in Hong Kong and Macau and the dissemination of informati of the Great Famine among missionaries, diplomats, journalists and charitable organizations.The study highlights Hong Kong and Macau's strategic position as a window of information connecting China to the West. The intersection of diplomatic, colonial and religious sources highlight the methodology of the research. The central question that the study looks into is t what extent missionaries in Hong Kong and Macau had nourished the different information networks, notably in the diplomatic, journalistic and anti-communist milieux and how filters information were applied through political, anticommunist and humanitarian lenses, against the backdrop of the Cold War. The study highlights the politicization of famine refugees and how this issue stirred internal divisions within Cold War alliances, particularly between the United States and Britain, while also showing how local famine relief efforts were negotiated and became intertwined with international humanitarian initiatives.
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 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".