MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2883155936 · doi:10.1515/soeu-2018-0019

A Word on Kosovo’s First Ten Years

2018· article· en· W2883155936 on OpenAlexaff
Robert Austin

Bibliographic record

VenueComparative Southeast European Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicBalkans: History, Politics, Society
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMarketing buzzSovereigntyPolitical scienceEliteIndependence (probability theory)State (computer science)Profit (economics)LawDevelopment economicsPoliticsBusinessEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Kosovo celebrated ten years of fraught independence in February. While there were some good reasons to celebrate, Kosovo still hovers between a failed and a functioning state. Its main economic indicators are extremely bad with no signs of improving. Unemployment, particularly among its youth, is feeding an ongoing brain drain. The legacy of the United Nations Mission (UNMIK) and now the European Union Mission (EULEX) is mixed, but neither was successful in creating the conditions for Kosovo to function as a normal state. Agreements between Belgrade and Prishtina to provide more rights to the Serb communities especially in the north have undermined Kosovo’s sovereignty. Now, the buzz in Prishtina speaks of a territorial swap between Serbia and Kosovo that would pave the way for mutual recognition. The domestic elite have proven more interested in short term survival and profit than in making historic progress. A stale consensus prevails that maybe this is the best that can be hoped for.

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)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Commentary · Consensus signal: Commentary
Teacher disagreement score0.031
Threshold uncertainty score0.061

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0060.006
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.156
GPT teacher head0.379
Teacher spread0.223 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreCommentary

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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueComparative Southeast European StudiesSame topicBalkans: History, Politics, SocietyFrench-language works237,207