MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W142473024 · doi:10.7202/700961ar

La conférence de Berlin de juin 1976 : analyse du discours communiste

2005· article· en· W142473024 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Lilly Marcou

Bibliographic record

VenueÉtudes internationales · 2005
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCommunism, Protests, Social Movements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCommunismOpposition (politics)Political sciencePhenomenonTurning pointPolitical economyEconomic historyLawSociologyHistoryPoliticsAestheticsArtPeriod (music)PhilosophyEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Berlin Congress would seem to have completed the historic sequence of Congresses begun in 1957 with the Moscow world congress of Communist parties. It represents a turning point in the history of the Communist movement, especially as it pertains to Europe. Its long and laborious preparatory phase as well as the density and contradictory nature of its proceedings provide a new image of European Communism in crisis by bringing together a diversity of governing parties. Certain among the latter are all-powerful in their countries, others, important opposition forces involved closely or indirectly in the process of governing, while others are either underground or represent an infinitely small portion of their respective electorates. The Berlin Congress was the theater of debates containing the potentialities of conflict that animate the European Communist parties. It confirmed and stabilized a major phenomenon whose origins are to be found at the world Communist Party Congress of 1969 - Eurocommunism.

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)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.072
Threshold uncertainty score0.143

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0050.003
Scholarly communication0.0070.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0010.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0160.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.329 · 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 designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueÉtudes internationalesSame topicCommunism, Protests, Social MovementsFrench-language works237,207