MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1981743575 · doi:10.1080/1028258032000144811

The Russian mafia: Expulsion of law

2003· article· en· W1981743575 on OpenAlexaff
Alexander Shvarts

Bibliographic record

VenueContemporary Justice Review · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Illicit Activities, and Governance
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLawNormalization (sociology)Punishment (psychology)State (computer science)SovereigntyPolitical sciencePower (physics)DisciplineSociologyLaw and economicsPoliticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The purpose of this paper will be to determine whether the conditions that exist in present‐day Russia are congruent with Foucault's claim that power in modern societies is not ensured by law and punishment but by normalization and control, which go beyond the state and its apparatuses, and that law plays an increasingly subordinate role within contemporary disciplinary society. I will also see what conclusions can be drawn from the Russian‐Soviet case that are relevant to evaluating the paradigms supplied by Foucault in deciphering the modalities of power in the modern world. In what sense can he help us understand how discipline and law in Imperial and Soviet Russia created the necessary conditions for the emergence of the Russian Mafia? Law has been transformed in the hands of the Russian Mafia and has expanded its spheres of influence rather than being displaced. The conditions that exist in present‐day Russia can be applied to Foucault's claim that power in modern societies is not ensured by law and punishment but by normalization and control which go beyond the state and its apparatuses. But it is not the case that law plays an increasingly subordinate role in present‐day Russia. Rather, it is no longer controlled by the sovereign power of the monarchy or by the Soviet state and its apparatuses, but is now predominately controlled by the Russian Mafia.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.976
Threshold uncertainty score0.474

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
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 head0.075
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations3
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueContemporary Justice ReviewSame topicCrime, Illicit Activities, and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207