MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2064083615 · doi:10.1353/dsp.2011.0037

Remapping the World After the Crisis in Area Studies

2001· article· en· W2064083615 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Peter Rutland

Bibliographic record

VenueDiaspora A Journal of Transnational Studies · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Relations and Foreign Policy
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Remapping the World After the Crisis in Area Studies Peter Rutland (bio) Beyond the Area Studies Wars: Toward a New International Studies. Ed. Neil Waters. Hanover, VT: Middlebury College Press, 2000. Peter Rutland Wesleyan University Peter Rutland Peter Rutland is Professor of Government at Wesleyan University in Middletown, Connecticut, where he teaches Comparative Politics and Political Economy. He is also an Associate of the Davis Center for Russian Studies at Harvard University. Rutland is the author of three books and the co-editor of three others, as well as author of some fifty articles and book chapters. His most recent work includes Business and the State in Contemporary Russia (Westview Press, 2000) and such articles as "Putin's Path to Power" (Post-Soviet Affairs, 2000); "Paradigms for Russian Policy in the Caspian Region," in Energy and Conflict in Central Asia and the Caucasus, edited by Robert Ebel and Rajan Menon (Rowman and Littlefield, 2000); and "Mission Impossible? The IMF and the Failure of the Market Transition in Russia" (Review of International Studies, 1999). Works Cited Anderson, Benedict. The Spectre of Comparisons: Nationalism, Southeast Asia, and the World. London: Verso, 1998. Google Scholar Schemo, Diane. "Use of English as World Tongue Is Booming." New York Times 16 Apr. 2001: A1. Google Scholar Copyright © 2001 University of Toronto Press, Inc.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.493
Threshold uncertainty score0.382

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
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 head0.081
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.306 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations3
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueDiaspora A Journal of Transnational StudiesSame topicInternational Relations and Foreign PolicyFrench-language works237,207