Евразийская интеграция: настоящее и будущее
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The article deals with the process of European socio-economic integration, its distinctive features and complexity at this stage. According to the authors, the course of the Russian Federation in the Eurasian integration is characterized by the following features. Firstly, it is carried out under the international sanctions taken against our country, the US, Canada and EU countries. Secondly, it is complicated by significant differences in mentality, a variety of cultures and historical features of the eastern civilizations. Thirdly, the Eurasian integration takes place in an extremely unfavorable geopolitical and socioeconomic conditions, on the background of sharpening contradictions along the axis of “East West”. These circumstances leave their mark not only on the character, but also the dynamics and specific directions and forms of the Eurasian integration. The article concludes that different algorithms of Eurasian integration in the CIS and far abroad. The most important challenges posed by the dynamics of the Eurasian integration, the authors consider the demographic situation, a different level of socio-economic development of the participating countries in this integration and threat to international and national security. A special place in the article devoted to the analysis of the factors of Eurasian integration, which are endogenous in nature and characterized the Russian economy itself. Among them: the consequences of the collapse of the Soviet Union; the effects of the global economic crisis; demographic problems; the transformation of traditional institutions; some inconsistency in economic policy. On the basis of a comparative analysis of the economic policy of the Russian Federation and China in the article the role of government regulation in a market economy and the potential of our country in the future development of the Eurasian economic integration is shown.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.005 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".