MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1505661989 · doi:10.29173/cons16289

Differing Interpretations: Causes of the Collapse of the Soviet Union

2012· article· en· W1505661989 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueConstellations · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEastern European Communism and Reforms
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHistoriographySoviet unionPeriod (music)HistoryPolitical scienceFocus (optics)LawPoliticsAestheticsPhilosophyPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This historiography paper analyzes a sample of the body of writing regarding the causes of Soviet collapse that has appeared in the last 20 years. There are several themes that the time-period's histories address, but, for the most part, they conveniently tend to focus on the central question of “why did the Soviet Union collapse?” As most secondary sources tackle the question directly and coherently, this essay will argue that historiography is best classified by "factors of collapse‟. Furthermore, this essay will contend that there is a correlation between mediums of writing and the "factor of collapse‟ they tend to espouse.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.257
Threshold uncertainty score0.324

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.284
Teacher spread0.256 · 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