MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Young Towns: Scaling Sites of Memory

2017· article· en· W2760934302 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Natalya Veselkova, Михаил Николаевич Вандышев, Elena Pryamikova

Bibliographic record

VenueSotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological Review · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicMemory, Trauma, and Commemoration
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEuropean CommissionMcMaster UniversityYale University
KeywordsHuman settlementCompetence (human resources)GeographyInterviewRegional scienceScale (ratio)Oral historyYearbookSociologyCartographyPsychologyComputer scienceArchaeologySocial psychologyLibrary scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

It has been assumed to regard young towns built during Soviet times as possessing only a “short history”. To deal with the sites of memory of such settlements, an especial research approach is elaborated integrating both theoretical resources of memory studies and scale studies. According to this approach, sites of memory are analyzed as a), in temporal and space coordinates, and b), from the perspective of “ordinary” people. Two groups of scales, 1) worldwide and national, and 2) regional and urban, are considered as the materials of the empirical research in the four young Ural towns of Kachkanar, Krasnoturinsk, Lesnoy, and Zarechny. The main methods of data-gathering were go-along interviewing and photo mapping. The data sources include the archives of the local, regional, and central printed presses, archival documents including minutes of Communist Party meetings, the official website of each town, and others. As our research has shown, the most time-depth, up to centuries and millennia, is characteristic of the sites of memory on a regional scale; in other cases, memory extends no further than the biography of two or three generations. Large scales provide the residents of small settlements with a portal to the big world, helping them to feel a connectedness with other cities and countries. Local-scale sites of memory symbolically unites people in a single community, allowing a shared perception of space and local competence. In conclusion, the analytical traps inherited from the original concepts are discussed as well as the opportunities to overcome them and the prospects for further research, such as the study of scaling as a process, coming from above and below, purposefully and spontaneously, or formally and informally. Of particular interest are the scales intersections, the slip of the sites of memory on the scales, and the fixing by the effects of understatement and exaggeration of scale (scale-ups and scale-downs).

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.008
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0030.010
Scholarly communication0.0070.006
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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 head0.130
GPT teacher head0.395
Teacher spread0.266 · 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

Citations7
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSotsiologicheskoe Obozrenie / Russian Sociological ReviewSame topicMemory, Trauma, and CommemorationFrench-language works237,207