MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1603878528 · doi:10.21971/p7160p

The Rise and Fall of the Yugoslav-Soviet Alliance, 1945-1948

2010· article· en· W1603878528 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Vojin Majstorović

Bibliographic record

VenueCrossing boundaries · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEconomics, Econometrics and Finance
TopicBalkan and Eastern European Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExpansionismAllianceDemisePolitical scienceCommunismForeign policyEconomic historyPopularityPolitical economyPoliticsLawHistorySociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This essay discusses the Yugoslav-Soviet relations from the end of the Second World War until early 1948, when Stalin expelled Tito from the international communist movement. The primary focus is on the interaction of Moscow and Belgrade’s policies towards Albania, which until the middle of 1947 revealed the strength of the Yugoslav-Soviet relationship. Likewise, Stalin chose Albania to be the main frontline of the conflict when he turned against Tito. The demise of the Yugoslav-Soviet alliance, however, was not caused by the competition between Tito and Stalin for influence in Albania. Although Belgrade placed Moscow in the centre of its foreign policy by seeking the latter’s approval and support for its expansionism, Kremlin’s policies were dictated by considerations far greater than the bilateral ties between the two countries. When Soviet policy makers became convinced that the American commitment to Western Europe was permanent in the wake of the Marshall Plan, Kremlin decided to Stalinize the nascent communist bloc. In view of its popularity at home and assertiveness abroad, the Titoist regime was bound to be the primary victim of the Stalinization drive.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.095
Threshold uncertainty score0.189

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0030.002
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.217
Teacher spread0.196 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCrossing boundariesSame topicBalkan and Eastern European StudiesFrench-language works237,207