MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2328630890 · doi:10.1080/23745118.2016.1154236

Choosing Europe over Russia: what has Ukraine gained?

2016· article· en· W2328630890 on OpenAlex
Mikhail A. Molchanov

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Politics and Society · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRussia and Soviet political economy
Canadian institutionsSt. Thomas University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsModernization theoryVulnerability (computing)Political scienceCustoms unionInternational tradeEuropean unionCold warEconomic unionDevelopment economicsEconomyEconomic policyEconomicsPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ukraine's choice of European association and Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Agreement (DCFTA) with the EU over membership in the Eurasian Customs Union (ECU) advocated by Russia has plunged the country into chaos and led to the most serious security crisis in Europe since the end of the Cold War. While much has been said about Russia's role in provoking the crisis and contributing to Ukraine's misery, the discussion of relative economic merits of Ukraine's European association versus Eurasian integration has been put on back burner now that Ukraine's choice seems to be clear. This article revisits the question, arguing that the DCFTA increases the country's vulnerability to external shocks and accelerates the decline of domestic industry. In the short- to mid-term perspectives, Ukraine would be better off as a member of the common economic space with Russia and other ECU states, while in the long-term perspective ECU membership could offer a less painful, albeit more protracted, path to economic modernization.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.966
Threshold uncertainty score0.788

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.270
Teacher spread0.243 · 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