Russian-Kazakh Cooperation as a Factor in the Implementation of the Eurasian Idea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conducted research is relevant due to the rapid development of integration processes at the post-Soviet space at the beginning of XXI century. The aim of the article is to analyze Russian and Kazakh collaboration as the driving force of Eurasian integration processes. The main method of the research of this issue is Eurasianism, through the prism of which Russian and Kazakh collaboration is under consideration. The results of the research prove the fact that Russia and Kazakhstan have lots of similar features and converging factors of geographic, historical, ethnic and confessional nature. The economics of the countries are inter-supplementary; their political approaches to the most global and regional issues are alike. In general Russia and Kazakhstan have not only good neighbourly and collaborating, but also inter-allied bilateral relations. This marks joint and active advance of Eurasian integration processes and the development of Eurasian idea in general. The materials of the article may be useful in conducting scientific research on the issues of external policies of Russia and Kazakhstan, providing lectures and seminars in training and planning specific measures on further advance of integration processes at the post-Soviet space.
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 | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".