MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2056793213 · doi:10.1080/13518046.2010.503144

4-D Soviet Style: Defense, Development, Diplomacy, and Disengagement in Afghanistan During the Soviet Period. Part II: Social Development

2010· article· en· W2056793213 on OpenAlexaff
Anton Minkov, Gregory Smolynec

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of Slavic Military Studies · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East
Canadian institutionsDefence Research and Development Canada
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisengagement theoryDiplomacyAfghanState (computer science)Political scienceGovernment (linguistics)PopulationSocial changePeriod (music)Economic growthDevelopment economicsSociologyLawMedicinePoliticsDemography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Part two of the authors' study of the Soviet involvement in Afghnistan deals with social development as one of the elements of the overall Soviet state-building strategy. The authors conclude that Soviet social development policies, the effects of Soviet inspired nationalities policy, and the heavy-handed response to the opponents of the Peoples Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) alienated much of the population. The government in Kabul was able to attract some support primarily among the urban and the more educated stratum of the society, but, on the whole, remained isolated from the rural masses. The inability to engage a significant number of people in the state building process seriously undermined the Sovietization strategy. Soviet efforts to raise literacy levels among Afghans, and to enfranchise Afghan women could be qualified as relatively, if ephemerally, successful.

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: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.036
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
Scholarly communication0.0030.001
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.317
Teacher spread0.285 · 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

Citations2
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of Slavic Military StudiesSame topicPolitics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle EastFrench-language works237,207