Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Important problem of modernization and reforming of economy and social structure of the Russian society is the question of transformations of the Russian working class. For quarter of the century it is public group significantly I changed. In industrial groups which on the structure are closer to traditional West European handicraftsmen were allocated. The Russian working class shares on two large social groups now: workers and new workers. The following professions belong to the last group: cooks, confectioners, gardeners, builders, finishers of rooms, drivers, etc. New workers are connected with service of interests of the Russian elite while old traditional are occupied at the large industrial enterprises. With them pass serious negative social transformations while new workers I show social and psychological characteristics, other than group of , as: social mobility, activity, high emotional intelligence and some other. The work purpose – to describe the main social specifics of group of new workers. During research methods were used: expert (n=25) poll, deep interviews (n=25), mass poll (n=725), supervision, analysis of statistical information, content analysis of the press of the Penza region. During research specifics of formation, development of this group, its main social and psychological characteristics were revealed and described.
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.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.018 |
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 it